DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGES IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF SIYASAH SYAR’IYYAH: A Study of the Constitutional Court Decisions No. 1/PHPU.PRES-XXI/2024 and No. 2/PHPU.PRES-XII/2024 (the Presidential Election Results)

This study delves into the significance and impact of dissenting opinions in Indonesia’s constitutional legal framework, specifically through an analysis of Constitutional Court Decisions No. 1/PHPU.PRES-XXI/2024 and No. 2/PHPU.PRES-XII/2024. In Indonesia, dissenting opinions, though non-binding, play an essential role in the judicial process by offering alternative interpretations and critiques of the majority's rulings. These opinions allow judges to express disagreements rooted in different legal reasoning, often contributing to a richer and more nuanced understanding of the law. By applying the perspective of Siyasah Syar’iyyah—an Islamic governance concept emphasizing justice (’adl) and public welfare (maslahah)—this study frames dissenting opinions as a vital tool for promoting justice and ethical governance within the legal system. The principles of justice and consultation (syura) in Siyasah Syar’iyyah align with the objectives of dissenting opinions, encouraging decision-making processes that are transparent, inclusive, and aligned with the broader interests of society. This research finds that dissenting opinions in the Constitutional Court not only provide critical viewpoints that can refine legal interpretations but also contribute to the legitimacy and resilience of legal policies. Furthermore, dissenting opinions often serve as a corrective mechanism, inspiring future reforms and guiding policymakers toward decisions that uphold equity and societal welfare. This alignment with Siyasah Syar’iyyah underscores the importance of dissenting opinions in fostering a legal environment that remains responsive to evolving social dynamics and rooted in the pursuit of substantive justice. Ultimately, this study highlights how dissenting opinions can act as a bridge between contemporary legal practice and foundational Islamic principles, ensuring that the ideals of Siyasah Syar’iyyah are meaningfully integrated into Indonesia’s legal landscape.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
istinbath
Published
2024-12-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.20414/ijhi.v23i2.772
Primary Topic
Islamic Finance and Banking Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGES IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF SIYASAH SYAR’IYYAH: A Study of the Constitutional Court Decisions No. 1/PHPU.PRES-XXI/2024 and No. 2/PHPU.PRES-XII/2024 (the Presidential Election Results)

Kelik Wardiono, Wilda Mawarni
istinbath
Islamic Finance and Banking Studies
article

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGES IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF SIYASAH SYAR’IYYAH: A Study of the Constitutional Court Decisions No. 1/PHPU.PRES-XXI/2024 and No. 2/PHPU.PRES-XII/2024 (the Presidential Election Results)

Kelik Wardiono, Wilda Mawarni
article en

Abstract

This study delves into the significance and impact of dissenting opinions in Indonesia’s constitutional legal framework, specifically through an analysis of Constitutional Court Decisions No. 1/PHPU.PRES-XXI/2024 and No. 2/PHPU.PRES-XII/2024. In Indonesia, dissenting opinions, though non-binding, play an essential role in the judicial process by offering alternative interpretations and critiques of the majority's rulings. These opinions allow judges to express disagreements rooted in different legal reasoning, often contributing to a richer and more nuanced understanding of the law. By applying the perspective of Siyasah Syar’iyyah—an Islamic governance concept emphasizing justice (’adl) and public welfare (maslahah)—this study frames dissenting opinions as a vital tool for promoting justice and ethical governance within the legal system. The principles of justice and consultation (syura) in Siyasah Syar’iyyah align with the objectives of dissenting opinions, encouraging decision-making processes that are transparent, inclusive, and aligned with the broader interests of society. This research finds that dissenting opinions in the Constitutional Court not only provide critical viewpoints that can refine legal interpretations but also contribute to the legitimacy and resilience of legal policies. Furthermore, dissenting opinions often serve as a corrective mechanism, inspiring future reforms and guiding policymakers toward decisions that uphold equity and societal welfare. This alignment with Siyasah Syar’iyyah underscores the importance of dissenting opinions in fostering a legal environment that remains responsive to evolving social dynamics and rooted in the pursuit of substantive justice. Ultimately, this study highlights how dissenting opinions can act as a bridge between contemporary legal practice and foundational Islamic principles, ensuring that the ideals of Siyasah Syar’iyyah are meaningfully integrated into Indonesia’s legal landscape.

istinbathVol. 23(2)
Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta (ID)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 60%
Islamic Finance and Banking Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.