Judicial Review of Marriage law has been proceeding into revision trial. towards the panel of Justices, led by Justice Wahiduddin Adams, Damian Agata Yuvens delivered several revisions about the reviewed Article (Article 2 verse 1 Act 1/1974). In the trial, held on Wednesday (17/9) at MK plenary Room, Damian explained that his side is no longer calling for Article verse (1) annulment, he asked the Court to give new constitutional interpretation over the Article instead.       

“We are no longer asking for annulment, instead, we are calling for a new interpretation. We would like to agree if the phrase says ‘marriage is valid as long as being conducted under particular religion’s rule, to which may be determined under the interpretation of each pairs,” Yuven said.  

To the Plaintiff’s knowledge, each person has his/her own interpretation over how a religion should be worshipped and applied, despite the fact that everything derives from same sources. Perspectives on religions are most likely varied, because somehow, faith must be implemented in context, instead of text basis.     

In marriage circumstance, some opinions emerge opposing each others. According to the Plaintiff, rights on marriage is essential while personal interpretation is also undoubtedly perceived. Thus, rights on inter-faith marriage must be handed to the bride and groom.

Debates of this thing have sprung lately, while the even point is far-fetched. Inter-faith talk conducted weeks ago failed generate clear issue as well.

Formal Review Request

Damain who stood alone in the trial, also asked for formal review. But the request was immediately declined, as Justice Wahiduddin reminded that such thing cannot be done. “Formal reviews can’t be called. […] Formal Reviews can only be applied 45 days after the regulation took place,” Wahiduddin replied. (Winandriyo Kun/mh/kun)