Jucicial review the constitutionality of the material Act 1 / 1974 on
Marriage filed Agustina Halimah binti Abdullah Kamil, re-tried in the
Constitutional Court (MK), Tuesday (09/08/2011). The trial for case No.
38/PUU-IX/2011 heard expert testimony.
In the presence of nine
Constitutional Court Justices headed by Moh. Mahfud MD, the power of the
Government, H. Sincerely declares, in the language of religious
marriage is called mitsâqan ghalîzhan is a strong agreement, to justify
the unlawful and makes worship. Marriage is intended to establish a
family life is eternal, whole, harmonious, happy, and prosperous. And is
a form of servitude to Allah SWT.
"For that, the marriage is
necessary to mutual understanding, understanding, awareness to build a
family that sakinah, mawaddah, wa Rahmah," Sincere said the Government
read the written statement.
Last road
Marriage Law, in case
the arrangement of a marriage breakup, according to the government, has
given signs that sufficient to provide a way out for the husband and
wife if they are not able to maintain a harmonious household. Article 39
paragraph (1) Marriage Law which states, "Divorce can only be done in
front of the courtroom after a court in question tried and failed to
reconcile the two sides."
"This provision suggests that divorce is
a last resort that should be taken if both parties can not maintain the
integrity of the household," said Sincere.
According to the
Government, divorce cases that occurred between the Applicant (Halimah
bint Abdullah Agustina Kamil) with her husband (HM Soeharto’s son
Bambang Trihatmodjo) is related to the implementation of law enforcement
practices undertaken by law enforcement, in this case to the Court of
Justice and Religious Affairs is not an issue of constitutionality
provisions petitioned for review them.
Based on the explanation,
the Government asked the Court to reject the petition Halimah.
"Rejecting the petition entirely," pleaded Sincere.
Potential Abused
On
the same occasion, Halimah who represented his legal counsel,
Chairunnisa Jafizham and Laica Marzuki, presented three experts, namely
Bismar Siregar, Marzuki Darusman, and Makarim Wibisono. Bismar Siregar,
said in his statement, the divorce between the Halimah Bambang Tri
Suharto after a few tens of years they foster domestic life, raising
questions. Because the petition Cassation Bambang examined and tried by
the Supreme Court Judge who stated that the relationship between the
Halimah Bambang incompatible with the harmony. Therefore, Bambang has
the right to drop the divorce.
Meanwhile, Marzuki Darusman said,
the explanation of Article 39 paragraph (2) f of Marriage Act has the
potential to be abused. "The problem that may arise among them, is
primarily a result of the wrongdoing of the parties, in general, men in
relationships with third parties that can not be accepted by the other
party, usually the woman. In practice, the situation is what led to the
elucidation of Article 39 paragraph (2) f of more harmful to women and
lead to women’s rights as human rights become vulnerable, "said Marzuki.
In
line with Marzuki, experts Makarim Wibisono applicant states, the
explanation of Article 39 paragraph (2) f is detrimental to women and
wives for not giving justice to him and reflects the lack of equal
rights for women with the rights of husbands and wives. The husband can
easily divorce his wife by reason of continuous disputes and quarrels.
"Because
that provision did not request or require clarification of who causes,
who the trigger, or what was to become prime clauses. This is unfair,
anyone women or wives who build the basis of noble households, derived
from a sense of love and affection will not be able to receive if her
husband’s affair and had an affair with another woman (WIL), "said
Makarim . (Nur Rosihin Ana / mh/Yazid.tr)
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar