Judges' Parameters in Deciding Divorce on the Grounds of Onheelbare Tweespalt

Permanent conflict that cannot be reconciled (onheelbare tweespalt) as grounds for divorce in Indonesia still faces a lack of clear legal parameters. Inconsistent judicial decisions and multiple interpretations of Supreme Court Circular (SEMA) No. 3 of 1981 demonstrate a weak regulatory framework that fails to ensure justice and legal certainty. This research aims to analytically elaborate the legal concept of onheelbare tweespalt as grounds for divorce and to formulate objective parameters for judges to uphold substantive justice, legal certainty, and legal utility. The research method employs a normative juridical approach, analyzing primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, as well as case studies of two Supreme Court decisions (No. 1425/K/Pdt/2016 and No. 1900/K/Pdt/2017). The findings reveal the need to strengthen legal parameters that integrate the principles of corrective justice, epikeia, and legal certainty to prevent decision disparities and ensure fair legal protection for parties. The novelty of this research lies in the proposal of ideal parameters for judges in assessing onheelbare tweespalt, which can be applied consistently in Indonesian judicial practice. The urgency of this research is reinforced by the importance of drafting binding judicial guidelines, such as a Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA), to replace SEMA No. 3 of 1981 and promote a fair legal system aligned with humanitarian values.