<![CDATA[A husband's hypersexuality is not among the grounds listed in Article 4(2) of the 1974 Marriage Law or in the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI), yet it formed the basis for a polygamy permit in Decision Number 12/Pdt.G/2020/PA.Ppg at the Pasir Pengaraian Religious Court. This paper examines the legal reasoning behind that outcome. Using a normative-empirical legal research method with a qualitative field approach, drawing on interviews with the presiding judge, the substitute registrar, and the second wife, it traces how the panel reached its decision and evaluates the ruling against the maslahah framework. The panel, it turns out, grounded its approval in the first wife's failure to meet her marital obligations, reinforced by the cumulative conditions set out in Article 5(1) together with Articles 57–58 of the KHI; her admission in court was accepted as conclusive evidence (iqrar), and the judges invoked the principle that preventing harm takes precedence over pursuing benefit. Viewed through a maslahah lens, however, the decision leans procedurally passive, rests on protective factors that are largely formal, and advances only a partial maslahah mursalah argument—one weighing polygamy solely against the risk of adultery while leaving its psychological and relational costs unexamined. Because of this gap in Indonesia's polygamy regulations, the benefit achieved settles at the tahsiniyat, or complementary, tier rather than anything more fundamental. The paper closes by recommending that judges in comparable cases require objective medical or psychological evidence before granting similar permits.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
