SHARIAsource

This open letter/fatwā to ISIS was signed by many Muslim religious scholars from around the world and circulated widely. This is the English version.

In Danial Latifi, the Indian Supreme Court found that the 1986 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act requires a Muslim husband to provide maintenance of a reasonable and fair amount needed to maintain his ex-wife for the rest of her life, but that he must pay this amount in total during the iddat period (three month post-divorce period).

This statute streamlines, unifies, and regulates, the Indonesian religious (Islamic) courts and officials. It was subsequently amended by Law No. 3 of 2006 and Law No. 50 of 2009.

This statute regulates the judicial appeals process. While it does not expressly deal with religious court decisions and the appeals process therein, it is referenced in some religious court appeals decisions.

This statute, which replaced Law No. 5 of 1974 and was promulgated by Soeharto's successor, B.J. Habibie, initiated the decentralisation of power vested in the central government. It granted the municipalities (kota), regencies (kabupaten) and provinces (propinsi) of Indonesia autonomy to legislate with regard all matters, except foreign affairs, defence, security, judicial matters, national monetary and fiscal matters, and religion.

This statute grants special autonomy to the province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam (Aceh) from the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia. It provides new financial regulations relating to the taxation of the Acehnese people, as well as in regards to the proceeds of Aceh's natural resources. It grants legislative power to the People's Representative Council of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, in which it vests legislative, budgetary, and policy surveillance powers. It provides scope for the election of a governor and executive, as well as the establishment of a regional police force and shari'a court system. Interestingly, rather than describing the Acehnese people as rebellious, the statute refers to their great resilience and fighting spirit, as well as having become an inspiration for those striving to achieve and preserve Indonesian independence.

This statute regulates the implementation of Aceh's special status, which it defines as covering the implementation of religious life, customary life, education, and the role of the ulama, in determining regional policy.

This qanun regulates the shari'a courts (Mahkamah Syar'iyah) of Aceh, as well as the personnel and hierarchy therein. It also defines the areas of law over which the courts have jurisdiction, those being al-syakhshiyah (family law), mu'amalah (civil and commercial law), and jinayat (criminal law). The elucidation of the qanun defines jinayat as including offences such as zina (extra-marital sex), accusation of zina, murder, physical abuse, alcohol consumption, gambling, and failure to abide by prayer and fasting requirements.

Superseding Law No. 4 of 2004, this statute regulates the various judiciaries in Indonesia, the judicial power and authority they exercise, and the jurisdiction and matters over which they may exercise that power.

This Supreme Court pronouncement states that while a non-Muslim wife who survives her Muslim husband cannot be considered a beneficiary (ahli waris), she remains entitled to inherit her portion of his estate as his wife, pursuant to a wasiat wajibah (obligatory will).

In this case, the cassation applicant had challenged the decision of the Makassar High Religious Court (59/Pdt.G/2009/PTA). As the lawful wife of the deceased, who had passed away on 22 May 2008 (they were married on 1 November 1990), the Court stated that as the deceased and cassation applicant had been married for 18 years, and as the defendant had devoted herself to the deceased while he was alive, it was immaterial that she was a non-Muslim. Moreover, that she was entitled to receive a portion of the estate of the deceased, as well as a portion of their joint assets as husband and wife.

This Supreme Court pronouncement states that the wife is to receive three-quarters of joint assets, because those joint assets were yielded by the wife, and the husband failed to provide financial support to his wife and child for 11 years.

The parties were married on 8 April 1995 and had two children. Since 1998, the parties had quarrelled. On 9 November 2008, the plaintiff, the parties' daughter, and their maid left the matrimonial home, after being driven out by the defendant. The parties had remained separated since.

In seeking a divorce, the plaintiff also sought from the defendant IDR 2 million per month in back-dated child maintenance, as the defendant had failed to provide the plaintiff and their children with any financial support since 1997 (132 months). Furthermore, the plaintiff sought custody of the parties' children, and IDR 5.5 million per month in child support going forward.

The defendant unsuccessfully challenged the Yogyakarta High Religious Court's decision (34/Pdt.G/2009/PTA), the Supreme Court, for all intents and purposes, reaffirming the Yogyakarta Court's decision. The Yogyakarta Court, however, had not acceded to the amounts in financial support sought by the plaintiff, ordering the defendant to pay to the plaintiff IDR 750,000 per month in child maintenance, until that child reached 21 years of age.

This fatwa (in its attachment) states that the provision of alms (zakat) for educational purposes, especially in the form of scholarships, is rightful (sah) because it constitutes a benevolent act of charity (ashnaf fi sabilillah). More specifically, that scholarships are a form of assistance derived from alms based on the Qur'an, surah At-Taubah, verse 60, based on the understanding that charity according to a group of legal scholars (fiqh ulama) from several schools of thought (mazhab), as well as exegisis scholars (ulama tafsir), is a general utterance (lafaznya umum).

The fatwa also states that Muslim students, as recipients of alms-derived scholarships:

1. should strive for academic achievement;
2. be prioritised based on their level of impecuniosity; and
3. study that which will benefit the Indonesian nation.

This fatwa states that the issue of women who, in the first three months after the passing of their husbands (iddah wafat), leave their homes in the evening is debatable (khilafiyah). The fatwa, however, adopts the opinion of the majority of ulama (Jumhur Ulama) who state that women may not leave their homes during iddah wafat, even to perform the hajj.

This fatwa states that there are two conflicting opinions regarding divorce (pronouncement of talak). The first is that the pronouncement of talak three times at once is akin to the third talak. This opinion was held by the Companions of the Prophet (Sahaba), the Tabi'in (the next generation), and imams of all four schools (mazhab) of Sunni Islamic thought. The counter opinion is that pronouncement of talak three times at once is only akin to the first of three pronouncements of talak. This opinion was held by Thawus, the Imamiyah school (mazhab) of Shi'a Islamic thought, Ibnu Taimiyah, and Ahlu az-Zahir. The fatwa states that the Committee finds the former opinion to be more sound. It also notes that marriage and divorce is regulated for Muslims in ss 10 and 31 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and ss 14-18 of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975.

The fatwa states that efforts must be made to prevent three pronouncements of talak at once occurring again. Moreover, that if state marriage laws are implemented correctly, there will be no more incidents of three pronouncements of talak at once in Indonesia. The fatwa also acknowledges the significance of the role of the religious courts (pengadilan agama) in preventing such incidents occurring in the future.

This fatwa affirms a raft of preceding fatwa that declare the teachings of Darul Arqam to be divergent from Islamic beliefs (Aqidah Islamiyah). It supports in full the decision of the Attorney-General of the Republic of Indonesia to prohibit the distribution of the book Aurad Muhammadiyah pegangan Darul Arqam, by Ustaz Azhari Muhammad, published by Penergan Al-Arqam. It also supports the Attorney-General's decision to maintain efforts to protect the prohibition on the distribution of the book Presiden Soeharto Ikut Jadwal Allah by Abuya Syech Imam Azhari Muhammad, edited by Ustazah Chadijah Aam, published by Penerbitan al-Arqam Indonesia.

The fatwa recommends that the Attorney-General of the Republic of Indonesia issue a prohibition on Darul Arqam and the dissemination of its ideas and teachings for the sake of protecting the purity of Islamic teachings and national unity. The fatwa also calls on Muslims not to be influenced by the teachings of Darul Arqam.

This fatwa acknowledges the principal distinctions between Sunni and Shi'a Islam:

1. Shi'a Islam rejects hadith not narrated by the Prophet's family (Ahlu Bait), while Sunni Islam (Ahlu Sunnah wal Jama'ah) does not differentiate between hadith provided that those hadith meet the criteria of the classification of hadith (mustalah hadis);
2. Shi'a Islam perceives imams as infallible (ma 'sum), while Sunni Islam does not;
3. Shi'a Islam does not acknowledge consensus (ijma') without the presence of an imam, while Sunni Islam does;
4. Shi'a Islam believes that political leadership/government is included in the pillars of religion, while Sunni Islam believes in general welfare with the aim of religious, spiritual, political leadership being to guarantee and protect the proselytisation and interests of the Islamic people (umat); and
5. Shi'a Islam, in general, does not acknowledge the succession of Abu Bakar as-Siddiq, Umar Ibnul Khatab, and Usman bin Affan, while Sunni Islam does.

Acknowledging these principal differences, especially with regard to government (imamah), the Indonesian Council of Ulama implores Indonesian Muslims to understand Sunni Islam in order to increase their own vigilence towards the flow of interpretations based on Shi'a Islam.

This jurisprudence shows that decisions issued by courts (other than the Supreme Court) at the final stage of appeal, can be submitted to the Supreme Court and treated as a civil case for the purposes of cassation. Such decisions from religious courts (pengadilan agama) or Islamic high courts (Mahkamah Islam Tinggi) cannot be certified by a state court, however, because religious court and Islamic high court decisions are deemed to not yet be legally binding.

This Supreme Court jurisprudence states that the conveyance of a cassation application to a religious court registrar that is not accepted does not detract from the rights of those seeking justice to submit an application for cassation directly to the Supreme Court (Mahkmah Agung). Moreover, with regards to religious court determinations that dismiss a husband's request to divorce his wife, the husband may appeal the decision, as well as seek cassation of the decision.

This Supreme Court jurisprudence states that, since the enactment of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage and Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975 on the Implementation of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, divorce as initiated by a husband (thalak) must be conducted before the local religious court/shari'a court.

This Supreme Court jurisprudence states that religious courts outside Java-Madura are authorised to make stipulations regarding Muslim inheritance and the beneficiaries thereof. With regards to the ownership of the house in dispute, however, it was determined that that was a matter for the state courts.