Analisis putusan pembatalan penetapan ahli waris penerus tahta Kesultanan Banten: Studi Putusan Nomor 786/Pdt.G/2017/Pa.Srg dan Putusan Nomor 0017/Pdt.G/2018/PTA.Btn

INDONESIA:

Pembatalan penobatan Sultan Banten ke 18 perlu didasari dengan pertimbangan yang adil dan benar. Agar mewujudkan keadilan yang hakiki, maka diperlukan analisis terhadap pertimbangan hakim yang membatalkan penetapan ahli waris Pengadilan Agama Serang Nomor: 0316/Pdt.P/2016/PA.Srg yang berbunyi “Pemohon I adalah Trah Keturunan Sultan Maulana Muhammad Shafiuddin (Sultan Banten berdaulat Terakhir) sebagai Pemilik Pertalian Darah Terkuat yang memiliki Hak Waris sebagai Penerus Tahta Kesultanan Banten”. Penulis tertarik menganalisis pertimbangan hakim dalam putusan pembatalan penetapan ahli waris Pengadilan Agama Serang nomor 786/Pdt.G/2017/PASrg dan Putusan Banding Pengadilan Tinggi Agama Banten nomor 0017/Pdt.G/2018/PTA.Btn. Kemudian menganalisis akibat hukum putusan banding No. 0017/Pdt.G/2018/PTA.Btn terutama hubungan kewarisan antara ahli waris dengan Sultan Maulana Shafiuddin dan harta warisnya.

Metode penelitian ini adalah penelitian yuridis-normatif yang menggunakan pendekatan kasus dengan menelaah bahan hukum berupa Penetapan nomor 0316/Pdt.P/2016/PA.Srg, Putusan nomor 786/Pdt.G/2017/PASrg dan Putusan nomor 0017/Pdt.G/2018/PTA.Btn. Penulis juga menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan untuk menganalisis masalah menggunakan hukum acara peradilan agama dan hukum waris Islam dalam Kompilasi Hukum Islam (KHI) dengan pola penalaran logika deduktif.

Hasil penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa Pengadilan Agama tidak berwenang menetapkan seseorang sebagai penerus kesultanan atau penerus tahta kerajaan karena bukan bagian dari hukum waris Islam maupun hukum perdata yang menjadi kewenangan pengadilan agama sebagaimana dimaksud dalam penjelasan pasal 49 huruf (b) UU nomor 3 tahun 2006 dan pasal 171 KHI. Pemohon I seharusnya tidak ditetapkan memiliki hubungan nasab dengan Sultan banten terkahir. Pemohon tidak dapat mewarisi harta waris dari Sultan Banten terakhir sebab peninggalan Kesultanan Banten bukan merupakan harta peninggalan (tirkah) pribadi dari Sultan. Sementara itu, perebutan asset Kesultanan bukanlah pokok perkara.

ENGLISH:

The annulment of the 18th Sultan of Banten must be based on fair and correct considerations. In order to bring true justice, an analysis of the judge’s decision is needed who has canceled the determination of the heirs of the Serang Religious Court Number: 0316 / Pdt.P / 2016 / PA.Srg which reads “Petitioner I is the descendant of Sultan Maulana Muhammad Shafiuddin (the last sovereign Banten Sultan) as the owner of the strongest blood linkage who has the Right of Inheritance as successor to the throne of the Banten Sultanate”. The author is interested to analyze the judge's consideration and legal basis which was used in the decision to cancel the determination of the heir of the Serang Religious Court number 786 / Pdt.G / 2017 / PASrg and the Appellate Decision of the Banten High Court of Religion number 0017 / Pdt.G / 2018 / PTA.Btn. Then the author examines the legal consequences arising from the appeal decision No. 0017 / Pdt.G / 2018 / PTA.Btn especially the inheritance relationship between heirs with Sultan Maulana Shafiuddin and the Sultan’s inheritance.

This research method is a juridical-normative research that uses case approach by examining the legal materials used in the form of Determination number 0316 / Pdt.P / 2016 / PA.Srg, Decision number 786 / Pdt.G / 2017 / PASrg and Decision number 0017 / Pdt. G / 2018 / PTA.Btn. The author also uses a statutes approach to analyze the problem of using the procedural law of Islamic justice and Islamic inheritance law in the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI) with a pattern of deductive logic reasoning.

The results of this study indicate that the Religious Court has no authority to determine someone as the successor to the sultanate or successor to the royal throne because it is not part of Islamic inheritance law or civil law which becomes the authority of the religious court as referred to in article 49 letter (b) of Law number 3 of 2006 and article 171 KHI. Petitioner I should not be determined as an heir who has blood linkage with the last Sultan of Banten. The petitioner can not be inherited by the Sultan of Banten because the any Sultanate of Banten’s goods was not a personal inheritance from the Sultan. Meanwhile, the Banten Sultanate's inheritance assets which became the struggle of the parties related to its management were not part of the principal case.