<![CDATA[This study critically examines the dynamics of jurisprudence as a source of law in Islamic family law in Indonesia, focusing on the contestation of authority between nash (Qur'an and Hadith), classical fiqh, legislation, and judicial decisions. Using normative-empirical legal research with qualitative content analysis of Religious Court and Supreme Court decisions from 2010-2025, the study reveals three main findings. First, authority contestation among legal sources is dialectical and productive for legal reform, with jurisprudence serving as an arena for legitimacy negotiation through methodological tools such as ijtihad, istihsan, and maslahah mursalah. Second, a significant paradigm shift from formalism toward substantive justice is evident, particularly in marital property cases, which have shifted from 50:50 division to proportional distribution based on economic contribution and unpaid domestic work. Third, legal formalization through the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI) provides legal certainty but creates tension with judicial ijtihad, necessitating strengthening jurisprudence as a pilot instrument for reform. The study concludes that jurisprudence is a vital instrument bridging classical doctrine and contemporary justice demands, though its function remains in tension with state formalization efforts.]]>
Copyrights © 2024
