Rereading the Concept of Joint Property: Fiqh Literacy in the Book of Sabilal Muhtadin and the Genealogy of Sheikh Arsyad's Thoughts

Joint assets are assets or wealth obtained during the marriage. Even though the property was obtained from the husband's work alone, the wife still has the right to joint property. So joint property, whether the property belongs to the husband or wife, has the same rights and obligations regardless of whether it is registered in anyone's name and all legal actions regarding joint property must obtain the approval of both parties. The type of research used is normative legal research. The issues raised are regarding the juridical consequences of the exception of bank secrecy for joint assets following Constitutional Court Decision Number 64/PUU- X/2012. The result of this research is that the issuance of the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia regarding the Judicial Review of Article 40 of the Banking Law has the juridical consequence that banks can disclose customer data for the purposes of civil cases regarding joint assets in divorce cases, so that the form between the bank and the customer contains a clause regarding prohibitions. For banks to disclose customer information, the application still has to follow the results of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 64/PUU-X/2012 because since that decision, Article 40 of the Banking Law has automatically had its contents changed according to the contents of the MKRI decision resulting from the judicial review of the banking law. Amendments to Article 40 paragraph (1) of the Banking Law as stated in Article 14 number 38 of Law Number 4 of 2023 can be submitted as guidelines for disclosing customer data for judicial purposes in civil cases including general courts and religious courts, which include for judicial purposes regarding joint assets in divorce and in order to fulfill the recovery of assets. From the explanation above, legal certainty can be obtained that after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 64/PUU- Joint assets in a divorce case can demand or reveal bank deposit data from their partner.

Joint assets (gono gini) are assets obtained by the husband and wife during the marriage. The assets obtained during the marriage will become one unit, so that when a divorce occurs, the joint assets (gono gini) will be divided into 2 (two), namely ½ (one half) for ex-husband and ½ (one half) for ex-wife. The legal basis for joint property (gono gini), namely: Article 35 paragraph (1) of the Marriage Law. Joint assets (gono gini) cannot be transferred/sold or mortgaged (secured) to another party, unless there is mutual agreement between the husband and wife. This is regulated in Article 36 paragraph (1) of the Marriage Law: "Regarding joint property, a husband or wife can act with the consent of both parties." And Article 92 of the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI): "A husband or wife is not permitted to sell or transfer joint property without the consent of the other party."

This research’s title is Grant of Joint Property to Children Through Private Deed (Analysis of Decision Number 287 PDT.G/2022/PA/MDO). The object of this research is Derden Verzet (Third Party Resistance) case Number 287Pdt.G/2022/PA/Mdo at the Manado Religious Court, Indonesia. The objective of this research is to analyze whether joint property that has been donated through a private deed remain joint property or the child's personal property and the strength of the evidence of a private deed in granting joint property to a child at the Manado Religious Court. This study uses a normative juridical legal research type with a statute approach and a case approach. The results of the study show that in the Manado Religious Court Decision Number 287Pdt.G/2022/PA/Mdo, the Judge confirmed that joint assets that have been donated to children through a private agreement are still recognized as valid, thus the joint assets that have been donated are no longer included in joint assets but rather the property of the children as recipients of the grant. The private deed of grant of joint assets from the Defendants to the Opponents has the power of proof because it is recognized as signed by Defendant II as the party who signed it.

Joint assets are assets acquired during marriage outside of gifts or inheritance. What this means is the assets obtained through the efforts of the husband and wife during the marriage before the divorce occurred. Based on the positive book that applies in Indonesia, joint property in marriage is contained in Law number 1 of 1974, whereas in Islamic law there are no regulations. The purpose of this research is to find out what the judge's decision was in joint property case No. 177/Pdt.G/2023/Pa.Kng and No. 763/Pdt.G/2023/PA.Kng, how Islamic law and positive law review the decision and to analyze the results of the comparison between Islamic law and positive law on the judge's decision in joint property case No. 177/Pdt.G/2023/Pa.Kng and No. 763/Pdt.G/2023/PA.Kng This research uses qualitative methods with a descriptive data collection approach. The type of research used is field research. The data sources used are primary and secondary data sources. The data collection techniques used were interviews and documentation. The research instruments used were interview guides and documentation formats. The data analysis technique used is qualitative data analysis. The data that the author obtained was then reduced, presented and concluded using comparative descriptive analysis techniques. The conclusion in this research is that based on the decision of the Panel of Judges it can be concluded that from the various considerations that have been made, in case No. 177/Pdt.G/2023/Pa.Kng The Hakım Council did not accept the joint property lawsuit because the lawsuit submitted could not be clearly proven regarding the status and specifications of the joint property. Meanwhile, in case No. 763/Pdt.G/2023/PA.Kng The Panel of Judges accepted the joint property lawsuit because each party had agreed to divide the joint property into two parts. Judging from Islamic law and positive law, sourced from the Al-Qur'an Surah Ah-Imran verse 159, Al-Maidah verse 1, Qaidah Fiqh "Harm must be eliminated" and the Civil Code, the decision not to accept joint property entitlement in the case No. 177/Pdt.G/2023/Pa.Kng and the decision to accept the joint property claim in case No. 763/Pdt.G/2023/PA.Kng is permitted because it is in accordance with Islamic law and positive law. Based on the comparison results, it can be concluded that the judge's decision regarding the joint property dispute in case No. 177/Pdt.G/2023/Pa.Kng and No. 763/Pdt.G/2023/PA.Kng both according to Islamic law and positive law, the decision of the Panel of Judges not to accept and accept the joint property claim is appropriate.

Joint assets are assets obtained either individually or with a husband and wife as long as the marriage is underway without questioning registered in the name of anyone. Although the term jurisprudence of shared assets is not found, the community practice does not separate husband and wife's assets in marriage giving birth to a conception of shared assets which is then considered to be syirkah between husband and wife in the institution of marriage. Divorce is one of the causes of the emergence of problems relating to shared property. The problem that is possible is that there is no division in accordance with the provisions of the applicable laws. The question is how to divide shared assets in Samalanga and what is the problem. The research is qualitative research in the form of field studies using a conceptual approach. The results of the study found that in Samalanga-Bireuen there were cases of joint property controlled by one of the wives or husbands, even though the customary practice of the Samalanga community carried out joint property distribution between husband and wife after divorce with a third pattern. This happened because between the husband and wife found that there was still an attitude of apathy and laity towards the existence of shared assets in the marriage.Keywords: Problems, Joint Assets, Divorce.

This research analyzes the concept and law formulation of the joint property after divorce in an Indonesian and Malaysian polygamous marriage. The problem that often arises is when the first, second, third, and fourth wives live under the support of the husband. However, issues with dividing up the joint property are likely to arise when one of the women decides to get a divorce. This research uses a normative juridical approach to achieve the research aims by collecting secondary, primary, and tertiary legal materials. The concept of marriage in Indonesia is regulated based on article 35, paragraph 1, Indonesia Law Number 16 of 1974, marriage law number 16 of 2019, and instruction of President number 1 of 1991. In Malaysia, this concept is regulated based on the Islamic Family Law Enactment, section 122:2, and the Fatwa authority of the National Council for Malaysian Islamic Religious Affairs (MKI). Furthermore, the regulation of joint property in Indonesia is regulated in article 94 of the Islamic Law Compilation and Malaysia in MKI 2003, section 122:2. In these regulations, the two countries have similarities in regulating joint property after divorce, as sourced from Al-Qur’an and Hadith. However, some deficiencies should be corrected to reinforce and explain legal certainty.

Joint assets is all of every assets that is obtained during the marriage, but grants and prizes are not included joint property. When the married couple decided to divorce, the joint assets must divided into two equals part. There is an agreement that is known as marriage agreement during the marriage, that the agreement has a purpose to separate the husband’s assets and the wife’s assets, so that all of the assets that was obtained in marriage are not joint assets. The marriage agreement could be made by a Notary, but it has to be registered by a civil register to be valid for third party. It is needed to do the research about how joint property divided after the divorce based on Putusan Nomor 236/Pdt.G/2020/PN and how a Notary holds authority about the marriage agreement. This type of research is doctrinal research with constitutions approach. This research used qualitative method and literature study. The results of this research are joint assets that the marriage was carried out without a marriage agreement has to divided into two parts equally and Notary as public official has authorities not only to make marriage agreement, but also validate that marriage agreement.

Joint assets is all of every assets that is obtained during the marriage, but grants and prizes are not included joint property. When the married couple decided to divorce, the joint assets must divided into two equals part. There is an agreement that is known as marriage agreement during the marriage, that the agreement has a purpose to separate the husband’s assets and the wife’s assets, so that all of the assets that was obtained in marriage are not joint assets. The marriage agreement could be made by a Notary, but it has to be registered by a civil register to be valid for third party. It is needed to do the research about how joint property divided after the divorce based on Putusan Nomor 236/Pdt.G/2020/PN and how a Notary holds authority about the marriage agreement. This type of research is doctrinal research with constitutions approach. This research used qualitative method and literature study. The results of this research are joint assets that the marriage was carried out without a marriage agreement has to divided into two parts equally and Notary as public official has authorities not only to make marriage agreement, but also validate that marriage agreement.

The legal status of insurance policies as part of joint assets is an interesting study because there are no specific regulations related to this. This study aims to analyze the status of insurance policies by comparing laws in the field of family law between Indonesia and England. This study is a normative legal study with a conceptual, comparative, and legislative approach. In Indonesian law, loss insurance, although the premium is paid from joint assets, is not categorized as joint assets because its function is to replace losses. In contrast, life insurance can be considered joint or personal assets depending on the source of premium funds, the purpose of the insurance, and the applicable agreement. On the other hand, the English legal system, which is based on common law, assesses insurance policies in marriage based on precedents and factual considerations, such as the source of funds and the time of the claim, although it is not explicitly regulated in legislation. This comparison shows that although Indonesia and England have different legal systems—civil law and common law—both have similarities in the basic principles of assessing the legal status of insurance policies, namely a contextual approach and based on relevant legal facts.

Property as a life support for the bride and groom in the marriage bond. Where the property is obtained before the marriage (innate property) and obtained during the marriage (joint property). If the marriage bond is dissolved or broken, then each of them will defend their rights to the joint property so that the joint property is often a serious problem and often creates debate between the two parties (husband and wife).The research approach method used in this thesis is sociological juridical. This research specification uses descriptive analysis. The type of data used in this research is primary data which includes the 1945 Constitution; Act No. 2 of 2014 concerning the Position of a Notary; Act No. 16 of 2019 on the amendment to Act No. 1 of 1974 concerning Marriage; Code of Civil law; Compilation of Islamic Law, as well as secondary data containing books and other supporting documents. Collecting research data with interview techniques and study of documents or library materials. The data analysis method used is qualitative analysis.The results of the research and discussion that: First; the division of joint property for couples who are going to divorce in the concept of justice, namely dividing joint property equally or equally. This is in line with what has been regulated in the Marriage Law, the Civil Code and the compilation of Islamic Law which states that if there is a divorce, the joint assets are divided equally. Second; The role of a notary in making a deed of a joint property distribution agreement for a divorced couple without a marriage agreement, namely a notary as a public official who has the authority to make an authentic deed including a deed of a joint property distribution agreement based on the will of both parties who agree to share their assets in accordance with the law. applicable.

The purpose of this study is to find out and explain the legal consequences of divorce on joint property in religious courts. To find out and explain the obstacles due to divorce law on joint property in religious courts. The method used by the researcher is Juridical Empirical (socio-legal research) and the specifications in this study are descriptive analytical. Based on the results of the study that resulting in marital property controlled by the husband without the consent of the ex-wife cannot/is not allowed to sell or transfer the property without the consent of the ex-wife. The obstacle: shows that there is still a lack of public understanding of the applicable legal provisions governing assets in marriage. Economic factors. Factors of objects or objects (Joint Asset or Gono-Gini property). The responsibility factor of the parties (husband and wife). The solution: the need for legal counseling to the community and the prospective brides who will carry out the marriage. The settlement can be through the village head, but if it cannot be resolved through the village head then through the court institution by attaching a certificate of incapacity (prodeo). The settlement of one of the selling parties must be reduced by the distribution of the value of the price of the goods sold. The settlement in this case is that the collateralized object is confiscated and auctioned by the bank as the creditor who provides the debt facility.

The purpose of this study is to find out and explain the legal consequences of divorce on joint property in religious courts. To find out and explain the obstacles due to divorce law on joint property in religious courts. The method used by the researcher is Juridical Empirical (socio-legal research) and the specifications in this study are descriptive analytical. Based on the results of the study that resulting in marital property controlled by the husband without the consent of the ex-wife cannot/is not allowed to sell or transfer the property without the consent of the ex-wife. The obstacle: shows that there is still a lack of public understanding of the applicable legal provisions governing assets in marriage. Economic factors. Factors of objects or objects (Joint Asset or Gono-Gini property). The responsibility factor of the parties (husband and wife). The solution: the need for legal counseling to the community and the prospective brides who will carry out the marriage. The settlement can be through the village head, but if it cannot be resolved through the village head then through the court institution by attaching a certificate of incapacity (prodeo). The settlement of one of the selling parties must be reduced by the distribution of the value of the price of the goods sold. The settlement in this case is that the collateralized object is confiscated and auctioned by the bank as the creditor who provides the debt facility.

This study aims to discuss the granting of property by parents who are accepted at the time of marriage or are still bound by a valid marriage as inherited property. The problem is whether the property received at the time of marriage is innate property or joint property (gono gini). This research is normative research, with a legislative, conceptual and case approach, using primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, tertiary legal materials, research data collection using literature studies and document studies and analyzed qualitatively. The result of this research is that the property obtained from giving (grant) is innate property. Even though the grant is carried out when the husband and wife are still bound by a legal marriage or are still in the marriage period, the property is still innate or original property. The inherited property of each husband and wife, whether the property was obtained before marriage or during the marriage period obtained by each of them as a gift or inheritance as personal property. The position of inherited property belongs to and is under the control of each other, during the marriage as stipulated in Article 35 paragraph (2) of the Marriage Law and Article 86 of the Compilation of Islamic Law. The owner is free to take legal action against the property. The inheritance of the husband or wife and such property cannot be included in the scope of joint property unless the husband and wife have arranged it in the marriage agreement.

The problem of joint property disputes after divorce in the jurisdiction of the Bengkulu Religious high courts, in the period 2010 to 2015 all decisions are always made up of half of the property of the ex-wife and the other half of the property of the ex-husband, regardless of who is more dominant in working to produce the property. This is based on article 97 of the Islamic Law Compilation. According to the authors the decisions did not fulfill a sense of justice, with regard to wives who participated in working for a living. The judges of the first level Religion Court in Bengkulu did not consider the role of the wife working for a living; which incidentally is the husband's obligation. How does the Maqāsid asy-Syarī'ah review the Bengkulu judges' consideration of joint property in the case of a wife participating in earning a living in the jurisdiction of the Bengkulu’s Religious high courts? and What are the implications of the judge's decision in the jurisdiction of the Bengkulu’s Religious high courts regarding joint property in the case of the wife participating in earning a living in the context of Islamic family law reform in Indonesia? The conclusions of this research are: Judges' considerations on decisions regarding joint assets in the case of wives participating in earning a living in the jurisdiction of the Bengkulu Religious high courts were not in accordance with Maqāsid asy-Syarī'ah, because the judge did not consider the position of his ex-wife who continued to work for a living besides running obligation to take care of the household. The judge's decision regarding joint property in the case of his wife helped earn a living in the jurisdiction of the Bengkulu Religious high courts in the context of reforming the Islamic Family Law in Indonesia, the judge must be progressive. The ex-wife who helped make a living should get a share of the joint property that is greater than the ex-husband. The ex-wife's portion was formulated peacefully and deliberately between the parties. Keywords: Commonwealth, Maqāsid asy-Syarī'ah, Bengkulu High Court of Religion

According to Presidential Instruction No. 1 of 1991 concerning the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI) Articles 96 and 97 on the division of joint property, each person in a marriage that dissolves due to divorce or death is entitled to half of the property that is joint property. However, the legal circumstances presented in Payakumbuh Religious Court's Decision No. 657/Pdt.G/2022/PA Pyk did not follow the KHI and gave the plaintiff (the husband) a portion of ¼ and the defendant (the wife) a share of ¾ of the joint property. Therefore, the goal of the analysis presented in this article is to respond to the judge's ratio decidendi when it comes to joint property that are unrelated to the KHI. Then, a more thorough explanation of progressive law as a method of legal change in the realm of community property is provided. The research approach employed in this paper is the normative legal method. The investigation's findings demonstrate that the judge's reasoning is predicated on the idea that the wife's inherited assets, rather than the husband's income from their marriage, constitute the joint property at issue in the proceedings. In terms of income, living expenses, or child-education expenses, the plaintiff was unable to demonstrate how much he contributed to the defendant's household during their time together. The plaintiff could not provide sufficient evidence to support his claim that he could afford to buy the property, house, and four-wheeled vehicle that are at issue. According to the judge's ruling, progressive law satisfies societal legal requirements. The judge's ruling about the contribution of joint assets served as a legal justification for not dividing joint assets in half, based on the facts of the case