cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Ardian Kurniawan
Contact Email
decisiojournal@gmail.com
Phone
+6282217439455
Journal Mail Official
decisiojournal@gmail.com
Editorial Address
Editorial Office of Decisio: Journal of Judicial Law and Procedure PT Gemini Littera Publishing Gajah Mada Street 75, Muara Bulian District, Batang Hari Regency, Jambi Province, Indonesia 36613 Email: decisiojournal@gmail.com Website: https://journal.geminilittera.com/decisio/index
Location
Kab. batanghari,
Jambi
INDONESIA
Decisio: Journal of Judicial Law and Procedure
Published by PT Gemini Littera Publishing
ISSN : N/A     EISSN : 31246583     DOI : N/A
Core Subject : Humanities, Education, Art, Social,
Arts Humanities Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences
Decisio: Journal of Judicial Law and Procedure is a peer-reviewed academic journal dedicated to advancing scholarship in the field of judicial law and procedural law. The journal aims to provide a platform for rigorous legal analysis, critical discourse, and interdisciplinary research focusing on the theory and practice of adjudication within various legal systems. The journal covers a broad range of topics, including procedural law in civil, criminal, constitutional, family, and commercial adjudication. It emphasizes the study of judicial reasoning, legal interpretation, and argumentation as reflected in court decisions, as well as judgment and case-law analysis that examines doctrinal development and consistency in judicial practice. In addition, the journal explores doctrines of evidence, burden of proof, and evidentiary reasoning, along with issues related to judicial authority and the role of judges and other decision-makers in the adjudication process. It also addresses litigation processes, procedural reforms, and the institutional dynamics of courts and judicial bodies. Decisio further welcomes contributions on dispute resolution mechanisms such as mediation, arbitration, restorative justice, and customary processes, particularly when analyzed within judicial or quasi-judicial frameworks. Comparative studies of procedural systems across jurisdictions and analyses of legal pluralism, especially the interaction between state law, customary law, and other normative orders are strongly encouraged. The journal also promotes empirical and socio-legal research that contributes to a deeper doctrinal understanding of judicial practice, with particular attention to contemporary legal challenges in both national and global contexts.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 5 Documents
 1 
Adjudicating Waqf Disputes: Islamic Legal Doctrine in Court Practice Maryani, Maryani; Zulkarnaen, Zulkarnaen; Sitompul, Osli G.; Uldin, Beni; Hendriek, Hendriek
Decisio: Journal of Judicial Law and Procedure Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): January 2026
Publisher : Gemini Littera Publishing

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.66882/decisio.v1i1.38

Abstract

Court decisions in waqf disputes constitute a strategic arena for the formation of Islamic law in practice, where classical fiqh doctrines interact dynamically with state law. This article examines judicial reasoning in waqf disputes adjudicated by Indonesian Religious Courts, focusing on how judges integrate Islamic legal doctrines with positive law to ensure legal certainty and protect public interests. Employing a socio-juridical legal research approach based on court decisions, this study analyzes selected waqf rulings using legal reasoning analysis. Several landmark cases, including decisions from the Religious Courts of Jakarta Selatan and Kediri, are examined to capture variations in judicial argumentation. The findings demonstrate that judges do not merely apply waqf regulations textually, but actively construct legal meaning through contextual interpretation. Classical fiqh principles such as taʿbīd, luzūm, and the social function of waqf are consistently invoked, yet rearticulated within the framework of Law Number 41 of 2004 on Waqf. Judicial reasoning reflects a pattern of integrative ijtihād, in which fiqh doctrines provide substantive legitimacy, while positive law ensures procedural structure and legal certainty. Judicial discretion is also exercised to balance formal legal proof with the social realities of waqf practices. This study concludes that judicial reasoning plays a decisive role in shaping contemporary waqf law as a living law. By positioning court decisions as a key site of legal development, this article contributes to Islamic legal studies, judicial studies, and waqf governance discourse, while offering normative insights for strengthening judicial argumentation and safeguarding waqf as a public institution.
The Concept of Substantive Justice in Islamic Criminal Adjudication: A Doctrinal Analysis Najemi, Andi; Fathoni, M. Kamal
Decisio: Journal of Judicial Law and Procedure Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): January 2026
Publisher : Gemini Littera Publishing

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.66882/decisio.v1i1.39

Abstract

Crimes against life represent the most serious violations of legal and moral order, demanding judicial reasoning that transcends procedural legality. In Islamic law, the protection of life (ḥifẓ al-nafs) constitutes a core objective of maqāṣid al-sharīʿah, positioning homicide not merely as a criminal offense but as a profound ethical and social transgression. This article examines judicial reasoning in adjudicating crimes against life from an Islamic law perspective, focusing on how substantive justice is constructed through judicial interpretation. Employing a normative legal research method with a judicial decision based approach, the study analyzes two Indonesian Supreme Court decisions, Decision No. 1282 K/Pid/2020 and Decision No. 813 K/Pid/2023 as primary legal materials. These rulings are examined to explore how judges assess intent, betrayal, and moral blameworthiness within the framework of positive criminal law. The findings reveal that judicial reasoning operates as a critical site of legal meaning-making, where statutory provisions are mediated through evaluative judgments concerning ethical gravity, relational harm, and proportional punishment. While Decision No. 1282 K/Pid/2020 demonstrates a stronger orientation toward substantive justice by incorporating moral considerations such as betrayal, Decision No. 813 K/Pid/2023 reflects a more restrained, procedural approach. From an Islamic law perspective, these variations highlight the normative potential of ijtihād qaḍāʾī in aligning adjudication with ethical responsibility and social justice. This study contributes to Islamic legal studies and judicial scholarship by positioning court decisions as arenas for substantive justice formation and by offering normative insights to strengthen value-oriented adjudication in cases involving the fundamental right to life.
Judicial Treatment of Mut’ah and Retroactive Spousal Support: Jambi Religious Court Decision No. 1015/Pdt.G/2025/PA.Jmb Marlina, Siti
Decisio: Journal of Judicial Law and Procedure Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): January 2026
Publisher : Gemini Littera Publishing

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.66882/decisio.v1i1.40

Abstract

This article analyzes judicial reasoning in determining nafkah iddah, mut’ah, and retroactive spousal support in divorce cases adjudicated by Indonesian Religious Courts. Using a normative juridical approach with a case-based analysis, the study examines the Jambi Religious Court Decision Number 1015/Pdt.G/2025/PA.Jmb to explore how judges operationalize Article 149 of the Compilation of Islamic Law within concrete adjudicative settings. The findings demonstrate that the provision functions as an open norm that requires judicial concretization through evidentiary assessment, evaluation of the husband’s economic capacity, and contextual interpretation of marital relations. Judicial reasoning in this case is characterized by the use of practical and relational reasoning, whereby normative mandates are integrated with socio-economic realities to balance women’s post-divorce economic rights and proportionality for the husband. The analysis further reveals that judicial discretion is exercised in a structured and accountable manner, supported by transparent argumentative links between legal norms, factual findings, and the operative part of the decision. This approach enables the court to avoid both mechanical application of legal norms and arbitrary decision-making. The study contributes to Islamic family law scholarship by demonstrating how judicial reasoning functions as a mediating mechanism between normative certainty and substantive justice. It also underscores the importance of coherent and reasoned judgments in strengthening the protection of women’s economic rights after divorce within Indonesia’s contemporary adjudicative framework, while offering insights for the development of more consistent judicial practices in religious courts.  
Constitutional Court Decisions and Substantive Justice Based on Islamic Values in the Pancasila State Burhanuddin, Burhanuddin; Yandy, Eza Tri
Decisio: Journal of Judicial Law and Procedure Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): January 2026
Publisher : Gemini Littera Publishing

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.66882/decisio.v1i1.41

Abstract

This article examines the evolving role of the Indonesian Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi, MK) in advancing substantive justice through constitutional adjudication grounded in Pancasila and informed by moral and religious values, particularly Islamic ethical reasoning. Departing from rigid legal formalism, the Court’s recent jurisprudence demonstrates an increasing reliance on principles of justice, humanity, proportionality, and public morality in interpreting constitutional norms. Employing a normative juridical research method with a conceptual and case-based approach, this study analyzes Constitutional Court Decision No. 97/PUU-XIV/2016 concerning the recognition of indigenous belief systems and Decision No. 24/PUU-XV/2017 on the constitutional right to religious education as primary legal materials. These decisions are examined in light of constitutional theory, comparative constitutionalism, and Islamic legal philosophy. The findings reveal that the MK no longer functions merely as a negative legislator that annuls unconstitutional statutes, but increasingly acts as a constitutional moral reasoner that actively shapes constitutional meaning. Islamic values, particularly those reflected in maqāṣid al-sharī‘ah, are not applied as formal sources of positive law but operate as ethical and normative references that enrich substantive justice within a Pancasila-based legal order. This integrative approach enables the harmonization of constitutionalism, moral reasoning, and religious values without undermining legal certainty, pluralism, or democratic governance. The article argues that Indonesian constitutionalism represents a distinctive model of value-based constitutional adjudication, offering a significant theoretical contribution to global constitutional discourse in plural societies.
The Quasi-Judicial Role of Hakam in Malay Customary Justice of Jambi as an Alternative Dispute Resolution Kurniawan, Ardian
Decisio: Journal of Judicial Law and Procedure Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): January 2026
Publisher : Gemini Littera Publishing

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.66882/decisio.v1i1.42

Abstract

This article examines the position and role of hakam within the Jambi Malay customary justice system, with particular emphasis on their function as a form of quasi-judicial authority and as an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanism within Indonesia’s plural legal system. Previous studies on customary law and dispute resolution have largely framed adat as a cultural normative system, while paying limited attention to the adjudicative functions exercised by customary actors operating outside the formal structure of state courts. Employing a socio-legal research approach with a qualitative juridical-empirical design, this study draws on in-depth interviews with customary leaders and hakam in Jambi Province, complemented by doctrinal analysis and a review of relevant academic literature. The findings reveal that hakam perform substantive judicial functions, including fact-finding, interpretation of customary and religious norms, the issuance of socially binding decisions, and the imposition of sanctions grounded in community norms. These practices position hakam not merely as mediators, but as legal actors exercising limited adjudicative authority within a non-state legal framework. The article argues that recognizing hakam as a quasi-judicial form of ADR enriches contemporary debates on legal pluralism and challenges state-centric conceptions of justice. From a normative perspective, the study recommends a model of recognition and coordination between state law and customary justice to enhance access to justice without undermining the social legitimacy of customary institutions.

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 5

 1 

Filter by Year

2026 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): January 2026