<![CDATA[Hadhanah disputes require judges to reconcile Islamic family law, child protection norms, and the concrete interests of children. Existing studies predominantly examine custody rights, child protection, or gender justice, while insufficient attention has been given to evaluating the quality of judicial reasoning that constructs the best interests of the child. This study aims to develop a legal-philosophical model for evaluating judicial reasoning in hadhanah disputes. Employing normative legal research through statutory, conceptual, case, and legal-philosophical approaches, the study analyzes the Mempawah Religious Court Decision No. 354/Pdt.G/2024/PA.Mpw., Pontianak Religious High Court Decision No. 9/Pdt.G/2025/PTA.Ptk., and Supreme Court Decision No. 563 K/AG/2025. The findings show that judicial reasoning has a normative and philosophical basis, particularly in incorporating ḥifẓ al-dīn as an element of the child’s best interests. However, its adequacy depends on whether religious considerations are connected to the child’s concrete condition and proportionately weighed against psychological, educational, health, social, caregiving stability, and emotional interests. The study proposes a Judicial Reasoning Evaluation Model comprising five substantive parameters and five analytical stages. The model contributes an evaluative framework for assessing the quality of judicial argumentation and advancing substantive, child-centered justice in Islamic family law.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
