Chief Justice Anwar Usman chairing the ruling hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 21 of 2008 on Sharia Banking, Monday (10/23/2023). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court issued Decree No. 118/PUU-XXI/2023 on Law No. 21 of 2008 on Sharia Banking at a ruling hearing presided over by Chief Justice Anwar Usman and seven other constitutional justices on Monday, October 23, 2020 in the plenary courtroom. The petition was filed by Lisa Corintina, a resident of Kali Balau Kencana Village, Kedamaian Subdistrict, Bandar Lampung City, Lampung Province.

Chief Justice Anwar revealed that the Court had received a petition dated August 31, 2023, filed by Lisa Corintina, which the Registrar’s Office received on September 4. In response to the petition, the Court issued a decree of the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court on the establishment of a panel of justices to examine this case. It also issued a decree of the chairperson of the panel of justices on the first hearing. The Court then held a preliminary hearing on October 5.

However, on October 17, the Court received an email from the Petitioner regarding the withdrawal of the petition. Following up on the letter, the Court held a hearing on October 18 to confirm it. At the hearing, the Petitioner confirmed the withdrawal of his petition.

“[The Court] stipulates, grants the withdrawal of the Petitioner’s petition,” said Chief Justice Anwar reading out the decree.

Also read:

Conformity of Sharia Banking with Sharia Principle Questioned

Withdrawal of Petition on Sharia Banking Law Confirmed

On Thursday, October 5, the Constitutional Court (MK) held a judicial review hearing for case No. 118/PUU-XXI/2023, filed by Lisa Corintina, a customer of the Wisma Metropolitan branch sharia unit of PT Bank CIMB Niaga Tbk. She challenged Article 19 paragraph (2) letter c of the Sharia Banking Law, which reads, “A Sharia (Islamic) Commercial Bank business shall include: distributing the revenue-sharing financing based on mudharabah, musyarakah, or other contracts that are not against the Sharia Principle.”

Through legal counsel Adhypratama Febriansyah Asshiddiqie, the Petitioner stated that the article had caused her constitutional harm because it did not explain the musyarakah contract, which is in line with sharia principles, in detail. She alleged that the article’s ambiguity had impacted the practice of Islamic financial services in Indonesia; there are still Islamic financial services institutions that do not operate in conformity with sharia principles.

Interpretation of Musyarakah Contract

As a customer of Islamic financial services, the Petitioner felt she had not received financial services that are truly in line with Islamic sharia principles. “(The Petitioner) is a debtor and/or customer of the Wisma Metropolitan branch sharia unit of PT Bank CIMB Niaga Tbk. She feels that the financial services she has been using are not in line with sharia principles, because there are practices that are not in line with sharia principles in the application of musyarakah contracts by sharia financial service institutions for the public in general and especially the Petitioner as a user of sharia financial services,” explained Adhytpratama.

In her petitum, the Petitioner requested the Court to declare the Article 19 paragraph (2) letter c of the Sharia Banking Law unconstitutional and not legally binding. She also requested the Court to interpret the phrase “musyarakah contract” in Article 19 paragraph (2) letter c of the Sharia Banking Law.

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Muhammad Halim
Translator  : Tahlitha Laela/Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.

---