SHARIAsource

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic shari'a on 3 April 2001 before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mas kawin) had been IDR 10,000. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor (aged 29 years) and the second applicant a virgin (aged 28 years). The parties were not blood relatives nor had they shared a wet-nurse. There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children and no third party had ever sought to impugn the sanctity of their marriage. They had never, however, received a marriage certificate issued by the Office of Religious Affairs. The parties, therefore, requested that the court ratify their marriage for civil administration purposes.

The sole judge found that the parties' marriage met the requirements contained in arts 14 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws because there had been a bridegroom, groom, marriage guardian, two witnesses, and the parties had exchanged vows (ijab kabul). The judge also cited expert Islamic jurisprudence (Ahli Fiqhi) found in Kitab Buhyatul Mustarsyidin, which stated that a marriage affirmed by witnesses present was indeed a marriage. Therefore, pursuant to art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3(e) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the judge acceded to the applicants' request.

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic shari'a in 2004 before two witnesses. The second applicant's parents had acted as her marriage guardians (wali nikah) and the dowry (mas kawin) had been IDR 50,000. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor (aged 28 years) and the second applicant a virgin (aged 23 years). The parties were not blood relatives nor had they shared a wet-nurse. There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children and no third party had ever sought to impugn the sanctity of their marriage. They had never, however, received a marriage certificate issued by the Office of Religious Affairs. The parties, therefore, requested that the court ratify their marriage for civil administration purposes.

The sole judge found that the parties' marriage met the requirements contained in arts 14 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws because there had been a bridegroom, groom, marriage guardian, two witnesses, and the parties had exchanged vows (ijab kabul). The judge also cited expert Islamic jurisprudence (Ahli Fiqhi) found in Kitab Buhyatul Mustarsyidin, which stated that a marriage affirmed by witnesses present was indeed a marriage. Therefore, pursuant to art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3(e) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the judge acceded to the applicants' request.

The parties were married on 8 August 1998 in accordance with Islamic shari'a. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nasab), the dowry (mahar) had been IDR 10,000, and two witnesses were present at the time of the parties' nuptials. At the time of the wedding, the first applicant was a bachelor (duda) and the second applicant a virgin (perawan). The parties also had two children. They did not, however, have a marriage book (buku nikah) because, despite having already paid the necessary administrative costs, their marriage had never been registered with the Office of Religious Affairs. The parties, therefore, requested that the court grant them a determination ratifying their marriage.

In acceding to the parties' request, the court, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 10 of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and arts 7(2) and 7(3)(c) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acknowledged that the parties' marriage had been conducted in accordance with Islamic norms.

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 7 March 1992 before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been seven mayam worth of gold in cash. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children. They had never, however, received a marriage certificate issued by the Office of Religious Affairs. The parties, therefore, requested that the court ratify their marriage for civil administration purposes.

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, and Kitab Ushu al-Fiqh by Abdul Wahhab Khallaf, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 4 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 20 April 2000 before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as the second applicant's marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 mayam of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had three children and no third party had ever sought to impugn the sanctity of their marriage. They had received a marriage certificate, issued by the Office of Religious Affairs, but it had been lost in the 26 December 2004 tsunami. The parties, therefore, requested that the court ratify their marriage for civil administration purposes.

In acceding to the parties' request, the court found that, pursuant to arts 2(1) and 6 of Law No. 1 of 1974, and art 7(2) and (3)(b) of the Compilation Islamic law, the parties' marriage constituted an Islamic marriage agreement (aqad nikah).

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 14 August 1995 before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as the second applicant's marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children. They had already registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs and received a marriage certificate. The parties, however, also requested that the court ratify their marriage for residency purposes.

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, and Kitab Ushu al-Fiqh by Abdul Wahhab Khallaf, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 4 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 20 September 1981 by a marriage qadi (qadhi nikah) before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been eight mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children. They had not yet registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs and required a court determination in order to obtain a marriage deed (akta nikah).

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, and Kitab Ushu al-Fiqh by Abdul Wahhab Khallaf, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 4 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 20 December 2004 by a marriage qadi (qadhi nikah) before two witnesses. The second applicant's older brother had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been eight mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children. They had registered their marriage with the local village (gampong) but not yet with the Office of Religious Affairs and required a court determination in order to obtain a marriage deed (akta nikah) and for other administrative purposes.

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, and Kitab Ushu al-Fiqh by Abdul Wahhab Khallaf, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 4 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 18 December 2005 by a qadhi before two witnesses. The second applicant's younger brother had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been four mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a widower and the second applicant a widow. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children. They had registered their marriage with the local village (gampong) but not yet with the Office of Religious Affairs and required a court determination for administrative and other purposes.

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, and Kitab Tuhfah, volume 4, page 132, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. In acceding to the parties' request, the court found that, pursuant to arts 2(1) and 6 of Law No. 1 of 1974, and art 7(2) and (3)(b) of the Compilation Islamic law, the parties' marriage constituted an Islamic marriage agreement (aqad nikah).

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 12 August 1983 by a marriage qadi (qadhi nikah) before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been four mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had three children. They had registered their marriage with the local village (gampong) but not yet with the Office of Religious Affairs and required a court determination for marriage administration and other administrative purposes.

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, and Kitab Ushu al-Fiqh by Abdul Wahhab Khallaf, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 4 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married in 2000 in accordance with Islamic shari'a before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 grams of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. They had never divorced, no one had objected to their marriage, and there were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children. The parties had never registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs, as evidenced by a notice of rejection they had received, dated 11 January 2016, issued by the same office. The parties submitted that they required a court determination ratifying their marriage in order that they could then obtain passports before undertaking the umrah.

The court, pursuant to provision (a) of the elucidation to art 49 of Law No. 3 of 2006, and art 7(4) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, noted that a marriage ratification request can be submitted by the husband or wife. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married on 9 September 2009 in accordance with Islamic shari'a before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 grams of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. They had never divorced, no one had objected to their marriage, and there were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had one child. The parties had never registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs, as evidenced by a notice of rejection they had received, dated 22 January 2016, issued by the same office. The parties submitted that they required a court determination ratifying their marriage before they could obtain a birth certificate for their child.

The court, pursuant to provision (a) of the elucidation to art 49 of Law No. 3 of 2006, and art 7(4) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, noted that a marriage ratification request can be submitted by the husband or wife. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married on 15 October 1999 in accordance with Islamic shari'a before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 grams of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. They had never divorced, no one had objected to their marriage, and there were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had three children. The parties had submitted the necessary documentation for the registration of their marriage to local village authorities but the documentation was never forwarded on to the Office of Religious Affairs. The parties submitted that they required a court determination ratifying their marriage in order to obtain birth certificates for their children.

The court, pursuant to art 14 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants. The court also cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, as an example of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties.

The applicants submitted that they were married on 20 October 1983 in accordance with Islamic shari'a before two witnesses. The second applicant's older brother had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 grams of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a widower and the second applicant a widow. They had never divorced, no one had objected to their marriage, and there were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had no children. The parties had never registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs but required a court determination ratifying their marriage before they could embark on the hajj.

The court, pursuant to provision (a) of the elucidation to art 49 of Law No. 3 of 2006, and art 7(4) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, noted that a marriage ratification request can be submitted by the husband or wife. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Jantho Shari'a Court (lower court), which had dismissed her claim for a divorce from the respondent on the grounds that her reason for divorce was not proven and not based in law, as required under art 19 of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, in conjunction with art 116 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws.

The Court considered that confessions made by the respondent, as well as information provided by witnesses, had established that the parties had married on 3 November 2007, but only lived together for approximately four months before separating. They had remained separated for almost two years (23 months). Moreover, the catalyst behind their ongoing quarrelling was that the respondent expected his wife to have sexual intercourse with him up to four times a night, but as someone who was up until recently virginal, the appellant could not cope and the respondent would only return to their home once a week and stay two nights. While separated, the respondent never returned to the appellant, but rather approached the local village head to request their assistance in having the appellant return her dowry (mahar) to the respondent because the appellant no longer wanted to be married to the respondent.

The Court found that the respondent was no longer treating the appellant as his wife in an appropriate and deserving manner, as directed by Surat An-Nisa, verse 19, of the Qur'an. Accordingly, the reason for divorce under art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, in conjunction with art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, being ongoing conflict between the parties, had been met.

The parties were married on 7 March 2002 in Wasponda, Soroako, Central Sulawesi (Sulawesi Tengah), by the local imam. The second applicant's father had acted as the marriage guardian (wali), two witnesses were present, and the dowry (mahar) was a one-gram gold ring. The first applicant was a widower and the second applicant a virgin, and there were no other bars to their marriage, such as being blood relatives or having shared the same wet nurse. After the parties were married, they had lived together and had one child, born on 4 February 2003. Their marriage, however, had not been registered with the local Office of Religious Affairs. In order to obtain a marriage book (buku nikah), the parties requested that their marriage be registered.

The court, pursuant to art 12(4) of Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2015, ruled that the case could be adjudicated by a sole judge. Furthermore, the judge, pursuant to art 7(2) and (3)(d) and (e) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, was of the opinion that the applicants' request could be considered by the court. The judge, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974, stated that a marriage is lawful if conducted according to the respective religion and beliefs of the parties, which in this case was Islam. Applying art 14 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the judge stated that the pillars of marriage require that there be:

1. a prospective husband;
2. a prospective wife;
3. a marriage guardian;
4. two witnesses; and
5. an oral declaration.

Finding that these criteria had been met, and that there were no other bars to their marriage, the judge, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, declared the marriage lawful (sah).

The parties were married on 25 December 1986 in Patue, Ajangale, Bone, by the local imam. The second applicant's father had acted as the marriage guardian (wali), two witnesses were present, and the dowry (mahar) was a one-gram gold ring. Both applicants were virginal, and there were no other bars to their marriage, such as being blood relatives or having shared the same wet nurse. After the parties were married, they had lived together and had four children aged 29, 25, 24 and 21. Their marriage, however, had not been registered with the local Office of Religious Affairs. In order to obtain a marriage book (buku nikah), the parties requested that their marriage be registered.

The court, pursuant to art 12(4) of Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2015, ruled that the case could be adjudicated by a sole judge. Furthermore, the judge, pursuant to art 7(2) and (3)(d) and (e) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, was of the opinion that the applicants' request could be considered by the court. The judge, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974, stated that a marriage is lawful if conducted according the respective religion and beliefs of the parties, which in this case was Islam. Applying art 14 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the judge set out the pillars of marriage, which require that there be:

1. a prospective husband;
2. a prospective wife;
3. a marriage guardian;
4. two witnesses; and
5. an oral declaration.

Finding that these criteria had been met, and that there were no other bars to their marriage, the judge, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, declared the marriage lawful (sah).

The parties were married on 27 December 2006 and had one child. The plaintiff's father had acted as the marriage guardian (wali nikah), and the dowry (mahar) had been IDR 200,000 and a prayer instrument. Since the beginning of 2015, however, the marriage had been disharmonious. The plaintiff submitted that this was because the defendant:

1. would regularly become angry with the plaintiff for no apparent reason;
2. would regularly leave the parties' home, unbeknownst to the plaintiff; and
3. rarely provided the plaintiff with financial and emotional support.

On 25 June 2016, problems escalated when the defendant confessed to having had an extra-marital affair. The defendant then left the plaintiff without first informing her, never to return. Realising that the purpose of marriage, as prescribed in Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, had been frustrated, the plaintiff filed an application for a judicial divorce (talak satu ba'in shughra).

The court acknowledged that the information provided by the plaintiff's two witnesses corroborated with the plaintiff's submissions, and that the defendant had not returned home, nor had he provided a forwarding address. The purpose of marriage, as prescribed in art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, that being to create an everlasting and joyful family, was no longer feasible. Pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the court therefore acceded to the plaintiff's application on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 15 June 2006 before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as the second applicant's marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been three mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had no children. They had not yet registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs because, at the time of their marriage, the Office of Religious Affairs was inactive due to post-tsunami reconstruction. The parties, therefore, requested that the court ratify their marriage for hajj administration purposes and other administrative requirements.

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, Bughyatul mustarsyidin, page 298, and kitab Tuhfah, volume 4, page 132, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. In acceding to the parties' request, the court found that, pursuant to arts 2(1) and 6 of Law No. 1 of 1974, and art 7(2) and (3)(b) of the Compilation Islamic law, the parties' marriage constituted an Islamic marriage agreement (aqad nikah).