Different Procedures and Legal Consequences

Oct 13, 2025 by pinkandtrash.com 73 views

The Inheritance of Adopted Children: Differences in KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129 (Research at the Medan Religious Court)

Introduction

The appointment of children or adoption in Indonesia is a complex issue, with differences in regulations governing them between the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI) and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129. This causes legal uncertainty, especially in terms of the heritage of adopted children. This normative juridical descriptive research analyzes the provisions of adopted child heritage according to KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129, by reviewing the literature and case documents in the Medan Religious Court.

Different Procedures and Legal Consequences

The determination procedure for appointment of children based on KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129 must go through a court determination. For Muslims, the determination was carried out in the Religious Court (PA), while for non-Muslims, the determination was carried out in the District Court (PN). The determination in the PA does not decide on adopted child nasab from his biological parents, and the birth certificate of adopted children does not need to be recorded or changed. Conversely, the determination in the District Court decided the adopted child's nasab from his biological parents, and the birth certificate of adopted children must be recorded or changed, making the adopted child the child of adoptive parents.

The legal consequences of the appointment of children based on KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129 are also different. According to Staatsblad, adopted children are cut off from the nasab of their biological parents, while according to KHI, adopted children still have a nasab from biological parents. Staatsblad requires an adoptive child to be called by the name (bin/binti) father or adoptive parents, while KHI still requires adopted children to be called by the name (bin/binti) father or parents' parents. Staatsblad sets adoptive parents as guardians full of adopted children, including marriage guardians if an adopted female child, while KHI did not make the adoptive parents the marriage guardian of the adopted child. Staatsblad states that adopted children should not be married by their adoptive parents, while KHI allowed adoptive children to be married by their adoptive parents.

Inheritance of Adopted Child

The inheritance of adopted children based on KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129 is also different. According to KHI, adoptive children get a compulsory inheritance that must not exceed 1/3 part of the assets of his adoptive parents (Article 209 paragraph (2)). According to Staatsblad 1917 No. 129, the adopted child is the heir of his adoptive parents, with the limits only to become an heir of the asset part that is not obedient.

Recommendation

The government should immediately realize the Law on the Appointment of Children which is in line with the interests of the Indonesian people, especially in terms of heritage of adopted children. The Medan Religious Court should coordinate with relevant agencies to socialize KHI to Muslim communities in Indonesia, with the goal of increasing community legal awareness and making KHI a positive law applied in the Religious Court.

Additional Analysis and Explanation

The significant regulation differences in KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129 show the need for legal harmonization in the field of child appointment, especially related to heritage. The legal uncertainty that occurs at this time can trigger conflict in the future, especially in terms of inheritance rights. This difference in rule also shows the need for a more comprehensive approach in establishing the rights and obligations of adopted children, including in terms of inheritance. Considering that adoption is a form of child protection and creating new family ties, the rule of law must guarantee justice and legal certainty for all parties involved.

Conclusion

This study offers in-depth insights on the legal complexity of the appointment of children in Indonesia. The results of this study can be used as a reference for the government and legal institutions in reviewing the regulation of adoption in Indonesia to be more in line with the interests of the community and ensure legal certainty.

Limitations of the Study

This study has several limitations. Firstly, the study only focuses on the appointment of children based on KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129, and does not consider other regulations that may be relevant to the appointment of children. Secondly, the study only reviews the literature and case documents in the Medan Religious Court, and does not consider other sources of information that may be relevant to the appointment of children.

Future Research Directions

Future research should focus on the following directions. Firstly, the study should be expanded to consider other regulations that may be relevant to the appointment of children. Secondly, the study should be conducted in other courts and institutions to ensure that the findings are generalizable. Thirdly, the study should be conducted in other countries to compare the appointment of children in different jurisdictions.

References

Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI)
Staatsblad 1917 No. 129
Medan Religious Court
Literature and case documents reviewed in the Medan Religious Court

Appendix

The appendix includes the following:

The full text of KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129
The case documents reviewed in the Medan Religious Court
The literature reviewed in the study

Note: The references and appendix are not included in the word count.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on the Inheritance of Adopted Children: Differences in KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129

Q: What is the difference between KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129 in terms of the appointment of children?

A: The main difference between KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129 is the procedure and legal consequences of the appointment of children. KHI requires a court determination in the Religious Court (PA) for Muslims, while Staatsblad 1917 No. 129 requires a court determination in the District Court (PN) for non-Muslims.

Q: What are the legal consequences of the appointment of children based on KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129?

A: The legal consequences of the appointment of children based on KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129 are different. According to Staatsblad, adopted children are cut off from the nasab of their biological parents, while according to KHI, adopted children still have a nasab from biological parents.

Q: What is the inheritance of adopted children based on KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129?

A: The inheritance of adopted children based on KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129 is also different. According to KHI, adoptive children get a compulsory inheritance that must not exceed 1/3 part of the assets of his adoptive parents (Article 209 paragraph (2)). According to Staatsblad 1917 No. 129, the adopted child is the heir of his adoptive parents, with the limits only to become an heir of the asset part that is not obedient.

Q: What is the recommendation for the government and the Medan Religious Court?

A: The government should immediately realize the Law on the Appointment of Children which is in line with the interests of the Indonesian people, especially in terms of heritage of adopted children. The Medan Religious Court should coordinate with relevant agencies to socialize KHI to Muslim communities in Indonesia, with the goal of increasing community legal awareness and making KHI a positive law applied in the Religious Court.

Q: What are the limitations of this study?

A: This study has several limitations. Firstly, the study only focuses on the appointment of children based on KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129, and does not consider other regulations that may be relevant to the appointment of children. Secondly, the study only reviews the literature and case documents in the Medan Religious Court, and does not consider other sources of information that may be relevant to the appointment of children.

Q: What are the future research directions?

A: Future research should focus on the following directions. Firstly, the study should be expanded to consider other regulations that may be relevant to the appointment of children. Secondly, the study should be conducted in other courts and institutions to ensure that the findings are generalizable. Thirdly, the study should be conducted in other countries to compare the appointment of children in different jurisdictions.

Q: What are the implications of this study?

A: The implications of this study are significant. The study highlights the need for legal harmonization in the field of child appointment, especially related to heritage. The study also highlights the need for a more comprehensive approach in establishing the rights and obligations of adopted children, including in terms of inheritance.

Q: What are the recommendations for policymakers and legal practitioners?

A: Policymakers and legal practitioners should take into account the findings of this study when making decisions related to the appointment of children. They should also consider the need for legal harmonization and the need for a more comprehensive approach in establishing the rights and obligations of adopted children.

Q: What are the recommendations for the community?

A: The community should be aware of the differences in KHI and Staatsblad 1917 No. 129 in terms of the appointment of children. They should also be aware of the implications of these differences and the need for legal harmonization and a more comprehensive approach in establishing the rights and obligations of adopted children.