Rechtsvinding Hakim Tingkat Pertama Dalam Menentukan Kadar Nafkah Pasca Perceraian Pendekatan Teori Keadilan Aristoteles

Abstract

All the Religious Courts in the jurisdiction of the Samarinda Religious High Court have different ways of deciding post-divorce living. This research is normative legal research. The results of this study illustrate that, First, there are three characters of decisions from each Religious Court in determining post-divorce living, namely the first way of direct determination without a specific calculation mechanism, the second way by calculating the husband's income divided by the number of family members and The third way is to divide the husband's income equally among the wife and children by dividing the husband's income by one third for the husband, one third for the wife and one third for the children. Second, the majority of religious court judges do not carry out Rechtsvinding, but judges from the Tenggarong and Bontang Religious Courts use legal interpretations by means of systematic methods and restrictive methods, while judges at the Tanah Grogot Religious Court make legal discoveries by concretizing legal rules. Third, the application of justice in the Tenggarong Religious Court and the Bontang Religious Court is a form of distributive justice, while in the Tanah Grogot Religious Court it applies commutative justice.

 Keywords: Post-Divorce Livelihood, Religious Courts, Aristotle's Theory of Justice