Act No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage reviewed in the Constitutional Court (MK), Friday (8 / 7). This time the divorce terms in Article 39 paragraph (2) f (Explanation) Marriage Act filed by Halimah Agustina Binti Abdullah Kamil told the Constitutional Court to be reviewed against the 1945 Constitution.
In case No. 38/PUU-IX/2011, Halimah as Petitioner and Choirunnisa Jafizham represented as legal counsel. Choirunnisa argued that the article has hurt his constitutional rights. In front of the judges of the Constitutional Assembly, led by Achmad Sodiki, accompanied by Anwar Usman and Harjono, respectively as members, the Petitioner said that Article 39 Paragraph (2) f haruf about marriage throughout the phrase "between husband and wife will not be able to get along as husband wife "incompatible with the Constitution RI 1945.
"Whereas the Constitution, namely Article 28D paragraph 1 of the 45 Constitution said, 'everyone is entitled to recognition, security, protection, legal certainty and a fair and equal treatment before the law." Likewise, in paragraph 2 of Article 28H 45 Constitution, which reads, 'Everyone is entitled to special treatment facilities and to obtain the same opportunities and benefits in order to achieve equality and justice,' "attorney Choirunnisa said represented as Petitioner.
Further in the petition, Petitioners argue with seeing most of the events that occurred, most of the wife who sacrificed in the quarrels and disputes. According to him, her husband became the most frequent causes of disputes and quarrels, for example a husband had an affair with another woman, would have a quarrel in the household.
Choirunnisa compare the provisions of the Article with the provision that is in Burgerlijk Wetboek (BW). BW no longer included in the turmoil and strife which continued as a reason for divorce. "Article 209 BW specify the reason of divorce, namely adultery has occurred, leaving the residence with a bad etikad, imposed a prison sentence of 5 years or more severe penalties again, after the marriage took place; heavy torture or ill-treatment, conducted by one of husband and wife it against the other in such a way, thus endangering the salvation of souls, or bring the wounds are dangerous, " Choirunnisa reading the petition.
Furthermore Choirunnisa say that Islamic law also regulates the divorce, which is due to adultery wife, or wives nusus although it has been advised repeatedly, the wife of a drunkard, a gambler or a crime which could disrupt domestic harmony.
Therefore, in his petition the Petitioner argues that Article 39 paragraph 2 letter f of Act No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage does not guarantee protection and legal certainty and justice to a wife. For that, the Petitioner appealed to the Court to declare does not have the legal power to remember the article.
Against the request, Achmad Sodiki, as leader of the Assembly waiting repairs to the applicant's request for 14 days. "A mother waiting for the trial to come," he said.(Shohibul Umam/mh/Yazid.tr)
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar