Electronic Theses and Dissertation

Pembuktian unsur nusyuz dalam perkara perceraian memiliki konsekuensi hukum yang signifikan terhadap hak-hak istri, seperti hak nafkah dan hak keperdataan lainnya. Namun, hukum positif Indonesia belum mengatur secara rinci standar pembuktian nusyuz, sehingga menimbulkan perbedaan penilaian dalam praktik peradilan. Permasalahan tersebut tampak dalam Putusan Mahkamah Syar'iyah Kota Banda Aceh Nomor 230/Pdt.G/2025/MS.Bna yang menetapkan Termohon sebagai pihak yang nusyuz berdasarkan alat bukti elektronik berupa screenshot percakapan, video keterangan anak, dan keterangan saksi yang menimbulkan persoalan dari aspek hukum pembuktian.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis dan menjelaskan bagaimana majelis hakim melakukan penilaian dan pembuktian terhadap unsur nusyuz dalam Putusan Nomor 230/Pdt.G/2025/MS.Bna, serta menilai kesesuaian pertimbangan hakim dengan asas keadilan dan kepastian hukum.

Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach), pendekatan kasus (case approach), dan pendekatan konseptual (conceptual approach). Bahan hukum yang digunakan meliputi bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier yang dianalisis secara kualitatif melalui penafsiran terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan, doktrin hukum, dan putusan pengadilan.

Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa penilaian alat bukti oleh majelis hakim belum sepenuhnya memenuhi prinsip hukum pembuktian. Bukti elektronik berupa screenshot percakapan tidak melalui verifikasi autentikasi maupun forensik digital sehingga keaslian dan keutuhannya belum dapat dipastikan serta tidak menerangkan suatu keadaan/peristiwa hukum (Pasal 6 UU ITE). Selain itu, sebagian keterangan saksi bersifat testimonium de auditu (171 HIR ayat (2) HIR/308 ayat (2) RBg dan pengakuan di luar persidangan yang memiliki kekuatan pembuktian terbatas/bebas (175 HIR). Adapun video keterangan anak hanya dianggap sebagai penjelasan (1912 KUHPerdata) Pertimbangan hakim juga menunjukkan inkonsistensi antara penetapan status nusyuz dengan pemberian nafkah iddah, sehingga belum sepenuhnya mencerminkan asas kepastian hukum dan keadilan substantif.

Disarankan agar hakim lebih berhati-hati dalam menilai alat bukti, khususnya bukti elektronik melalui verifikasi yang memadai, serta memastikan setiap alat bukti memenuhi syarat formil dan materiil. Hakim juga perlu mengintegrasikan secara seimbang nilai kepastian hukum dan keadilan substantif dalam menyusun ratio decidendi sehingga putusan yang dihasilkan lebih konsisten, objektif, dan memberikan perlindungan hukum yang adil bagi para pihak.

Abstract — The establishment of nusyuz in divorce proceedings has significant legal consequences for a wife’s rights, including her right to maintenance (nafkah) and other civil rights. However, Indonesian positive law does not provide detailed standards governing the evidentiary requirements for establishing nusyuz, resulting in differing assessments in judicial practice. This issue is reflected in Decision of the Banda Aceh City Syar’iyah Court Number 230/Pdt.G/2025/MS.Bna, in which the Respondent was declared nusyuz based on electronic evidence in the form of screenshots of conversations, a video containing the child’s statement, and witness testimony, thereby raising legal issues from the perspective of the law of evidence. This research aims to analyze and explain how the panel of judges assessed and established the elements of nusyuz in Decision Number 230/Pdt.G/2025/MS.Bna, as well as to evaluate whether the judges’ legal considerations are consistent with the principles of justice and legal certainty. This research constitutes normative juridical legal research employing a statutory approach, a case approach, and a conceptual approach. The legal materials consist of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, which are analyzed qualitatively through the interpretation of legislation, legal doctrines, and judicial decisions. The results indicate that the assessment of evidence by the panel of judges did not fully comply with the principles of the law of evidence. The electronic evidence in the form of screenshots of conversations was not subjected to adequate authentication verification or digital forensic examination; therefore, its authenticity and integrity could not be conclusively established, nor did it establish a legal condition or legal event as contemplated under Article 6 of the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (ITE Law). Furthermore, certain portions of the witness testimony constituted testimonium de auditu, as contemplated under Article 171 paragraph (2) of the HIR and Article 308 paragraph (2) of the RBg, while the admission made outside the courtroom possessed limited or discretionary evidentiary value pursuant to Article 175 of the HIR. Meanwhile, the video containing the child’s statement was treated merely as an explanatory statement pursuant to Article 1912 of the Indonesian Civil Code (Burgerlijk Wetboek). The judges’ reasoning also demonstrates an inconsistency between the determination of the Respondent’s nusyuz status and the granting of iddah maintenance, indicating that the decision does not fully embody the principles of legal certainty and substantive justice. It is recommended that judges exercise greater caution in assessing evidence, particularly electronic evidence, by conducting adequate verification and ensuring that each item of evidence satisfies both formal and substantive evidentiary requirements. Judges should also balance the values of legal certainty and substantive justice when formulating their ratio decidendi, so that judicial decisions are more consistent, objective, and capable of providing fair legal protection to all parties.