<![CDATA[Sexual violence committed by a father against his adult daughter raises a difficult question of statutory choice when the parties remain biologically related but no longer share an active household. This study examines Case Reg. No. PDM-28/SIPIROK/Eku.2/11/2024 and the Public Prosecutor's decision to rely on Article 6(c) in conjunction with Article 15(1)(a) of Law No. 12 of 2022 on Sexual Violence Crimes (UU TPKS), rather than Law No. 23 of 2004 on the Elimination of Domestic Violence (UU PKDRT). Using a qualitative single-case design, the study draws on a semi-structured interview with the handling prosecutor, the indictment as a supporting case document, and relevant legal literature. The statutory comparison indicates that, within the prosecutor's legal construction, UU TPKS more directly addresses abuse of position, trust, and influence without requiring proof of direct physical force. Through Imam Asy-Syathibi's maqashid al-sharia framework, the sentencing demand is assessed against hifz al-din, hifz al-nafs, hifz al-'aql, hifz al-nasl, and hifz al-mal. The analysis further shows that the absence of physical violence cannot be equated with consent because non-physical coercion may arise from psychological domination, economic dependency, and unequal family power relations.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
