An Analysis of Judicial Interpretation and the Contestation of Legal Worldviews (A Case Study of Decision No. 02/Pdt.G.S/2019/PA.Kdr)

Abstract

The pluralism of Indonesia’s civil law system necessitates an examination of the interpretive patterns and legal reasoning employed by judges in resolving Islamic economic disputes. This study aims to identify the tendencies and juridical reasoning structure of the judge through a case analysis of Decision Number 02/Pdt.G.S/2019/PA.Kdr. The research employs a juridical analysis using a case study approach focused on the judge’s considerations and legal arguments. The findings show that the judge applies several methods of legal interpretation—primarily grammatical, systematic, and extensive interpretations—particularly in aspects of evidentiary assessment and the application of the simplified lawsuit mechanism. Various forms of legal logic are also employed: subsumptive logic to align factual circumstances with the provisions on breach of contract under Articles 36–37 of the Compilation of Islamic Economic Law (KHES); exclusionary logic in determining verstek; derogation logic in navigating the relationship between KHES and DSN-MUI fatwas; and non-contradiction logic to harmonize KHES with the Civil Code. The judge’s reasoning demonstrates that the validity of the contract forms the primary basis for legal protection, while the validity of the murābaḥah contract, the elements of breach of contract, and their legal consequences reflect an integration of civil procedural law with Islamic legal principles. This integration serves as the foundation for achieving legal justice within the framework of Islamic economics.