SHARIAsource

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 applicant submitted that he had married his wife on 2 February 1985 in accordance with Islamic law. He and his wife had had four children. The applicant submitted that he planned to have his youngest daughter (15 years old) marry her 22 year old prospective husband (calon suaminya). The applicant submitted that his application was urgent because his daughter and her prospective husband were already close and he was concerned that they may conduct themselves in a manner contrary to Islamic law if they were not married immediately.

The court, pursuant to art 7(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage and art 49(1) of Law No. 59 of 2009, acceded to the applicant's request for marriage dispensation.

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 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).

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 applicants submitted that they were married on 6 April 2006 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 five grams of gold. The parties had one child. The parties submitted that they required a court determination ratifying their marriage in order to obtain a birth certificate for their child.

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 applicant submitted she had married Rudin bin Syeh Benu (deceased) on 16 November 1976 in accordance with Islamic shari'a before two witnesses. The applicant's uncle had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 grams of gold. The applicant and the deceased had had five children before the applicant's husband had died in 2003 due to illness. The applicant submitted that she required a court determination ratifying her marriage to the deceased before she could embark on the hajj.

The court, pursuant to art 14 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicant. 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 requested that the court ratify their marriage of 5 May 2004. Based on evidence provided by two impartial witnesses, the court acceded to the applicants' request.

The two applicants submitted that they were married by a qadi in accordance with Islam at the second applicant's parents' home in 1975 before two witnesses, and with the second applicant's older brother acting as the marriage guardian (wali nikah). The parties had seven children. Their marriage was never objected to by any third party and both parties had remained Muslims for the duration thereof. The parties' marriage certificate had been lost in the 26 December 2004 tsunami and, in order to have passports issued, they needed to produce a new marriage certificate. Accordingly, they requested that the court ratify their marriage.

In acceding to the applicants' request, the court acknowledged that the applicants had produced sufficient evidence, including witnesses, that established their submissions. The court cited fiqh from Kitab l'anatu al Thalibin, Juz II, page 308, which states that the admission of an adult male of sound mind to having married a woman, and vice versa, can be accepted. The court also cited art 7(2) and (3)(b) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws in acceding to the applicants' request.

In Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017), the Supreme Court of India declared the practice of triple ṭalāq (instant divorce) a violation of Muslim women’s constitutional rights. This legislative act is the result of that judgment and criminalizes the practice of triple ṭalāq.

On 25 March 1984, the plaintiff and first defendant married. They lived in Makassar and had six children. On 18 May 2011, the first defendant married the second defendant, unbeknownst to the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed that, as the first defendant was a state university lecturer assisted by the Indonesian Muslim University Waqf Foundation (Yayasan Wakaf UMI), he was obliged to first obtain his first wife's permission before marrying another person. Moreover, because he had not, his marriage to the second defendant contravened Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and should therefore be rendered null and void by the court.

Despite both defendants failing to attend the proceeding, the court acceded to the plaintiff's application, dissolving the marriage between the two defendants on the grounds that the first defendant had not first sought the permission of the plaintiff. The plaintiff was ordered to pay costs (IDR 571,000).

The applicant sought dispensation to enable his 15 year old son (Nasri bin Sampara) to marry his 21 year old girlfriend (Sasmita binti Idris). The applicant's son was 15 years and four months, had completed primary school, and was unemployed. The applicant claimed that all relevant requirements to conduct an Islamic marriage had been met, other than that his son was not yet 19 years of age (the required age at law). The applicant emphasised the urgency of the matter given that his son and his girlfriend had already displayed signs that they intended to become physically intimate, something prohibited under Islam if out of wedlock. While the Office of Religious Affairs had dismissed his application to register their proposed marriage, the applicant submitted that there were no legitimate reasons that they should not be married.

The court acceded to the application, stating that the two had an inseparable bond, and that they would otherwise be unable to abstain from contravening morality and Islamic norms if they remained unmarried. Moreover, they were not being coerced into marriage, they were not siblings, nor had they ever shared a wet-nurse, and their engagement had been assented to by both their parents. The court saw no other reason to prevent the marriage, as envisaged in art of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and arts 39 and 40 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, and therefore, pursuant to art 7(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974, granted dispensation to marry.