<![CDATA[This study examines judicial disparity in applications for polygamy permits before the Indonesian Religious Courts using Al-Shatibi’s framework of Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah. Addressing the tension between judicial discretion and statutory norms, the article analyses Decision Number 1286/Pdt.G/2014/PA.Mlg, which granted permission despite non-fulfilment of the alternative requirements, and Decision Number 1332/Pdt.G/2025/PA.Pwd, which rejected the application on a strict reading of Article 4 paragraph (2) of Law Number 1 of 1974. The study uses normative legal research with statutory, case and conceptual approaches. It finds that the disparity stems from divergent interpretative methods: the Malang decision employed a subjective-teleological interpretation that misapplied the maxim darʿ al-mafāsid, whereas the Purwodadi decision adhered to a formalist-grammatical interpretation. Viewed through Al-Shatibi’s hierarchy, the grounds advanced in both cases, namely the desire for more offspring and a high sexual drive, fall squarely within taḥsīniyyah, the level of complementary or embellishing needs. Overriding mandatory statutory provisions for taḥsīniyyah motives undermines legal certainty and judicial predictability. The article proposes methodological parameters for Islamic judicial discretion in order to prevent judicial overreach.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
