LEGAL REASONING BY JUDGES IN THE DECISION OF THE RELIGIOUS COURT IN THE DKI JAKARTA AREA REGARDING SHARIA FINANCING

This study aims to analyze the differences in religious court decisions on sharia economics based on the judge's ijtihad in interpreting and constructing the law. The legal interpretation carried out by the judge is ijtihad in finding the law on sharia economic problems in the decisions of the Religious Court in the DKI Jakarta area in 2016-2022. Ijtihad carried out by judges in making legal discovery efforts uses different methods or approaches so that there are differences in decisions. The concept of approach used in this study is: statute approach and case approach. The data sources in this study rely on the decisions of the Religious Courts in the DKI Jakarta area in 2016-2022 regarding sharia economic cases which include; Murābahah contract, musyārakah contract, mudarabah contract and istisna contract. The data analysis technique in this study uses qualitative descriptive. The findings in this study prove that the judge's ijtihād in making efforts to discover the law is based on laws and regulations and several related legal sources. Legal reasoning carried out by judges in examining, adjudicating and issuing judgments uses different interpretation methods or approaches so that there are differences in decisions in one sharia economic case. The ijtihad method or legal reasoning method used by judges is divided into juridical interpretation methods, namely grammatical, systematic and authentic interpretation. Meanwhile, the teleological interpretation method is the only method of legal reasoning used by judges as a contextual approach by looking at empirical evidence based on laws and regulations.    Â