Penerapan Asas Itikad Baik dan Kepastian Hukum dalam Sengketa Penolakan Klaim Asuransi Jiwa Syariah
Analisis Putusan Pengadilan Agama Medan Nomor 198/Pdt.G/2025/PA.Mdn
Abstract
This research examines the application of good faith and legal certainty principles in resolving Islamic economic disputes at the Medan Religious Court through analysis of verdict Number 198/Pdt.G/2025/PA.Mdn concerning rejection of sharia life insurance claims by PT Prudential Sharia Life Assurance against beneficiary heirs. Employing normative juridical methodology with case and conceptual approaches, this study analyzes the integration of positive law with Islamic legal principles in judicial considerations. Research findings indicate that the Panel of Judges applied the good faith principle (husn al-niyyah) in evaluating insurer conduct that rejected claims based on administrative grounds after policy issuance, constituting breach of contract. Legal certainty principle implementation manifested through judicial affirmation that claim settlement delays exceeding Financial Services Authority regulatory standards violated consumer protection rights. Judicial reasoning demonstrated progressive synthesis between Article 1338 Civil Code, Article 36 Compilation of Sharia Economic Law, and pacta sunt servanda principle in Islamic jurisprudence. This verdict strengthens consumer protection mechanisms and provides judicial precedent encouraging transparency enhancement and accountability in sharia insurance industry practices, thereby contributing to jurisprudential development of Islamic economic law in Indonesia.
References
Adila, H. U., Mukhlas, O. S., & Sururie, R. W. (2024). Penyelesaian Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah Berdasarkan Peraturan Undang-Undang. 6, 26–35.
Ahmad Baihaki, & M. Rizhan Budi Prasetya. (2021). Kewenangan Absolut Pengadilan Agama Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 93/PUU-X/2012. Krtha Bhayangkara, 15(2), 289–308. https://doi.org/10.31599/krtha.v15i2.711
Andri Soemitra, M. A. (2017). Bank & Lembaga Keuangan Syariah. Kencana Prenada Media.
Anshori, A. G. (2018). Hukum perjanjian Islam di Indonesia: Konsep, Regulasi, dan Implementasi. Gadjah Mada University Press.
Arisandhi, I. M., Al-Islam, M., & Ulum, B. (2025). Jurisdictional Authority of Religious Courts in Consumer Protection Cases Within The Islamic Economic Framework: A Normative Legal Study. Al-Insyiroh: Jurnal Studi Keislaman, 11(1), 156–180. https://doi.org/10.35309/alinsyiroh.v11i1.365
Basri, A. D. (2024). Analisis Hukum Asuransi Syariah Dengan Hukum Asuransi Konvensional. Iqtishaduna: Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Hukum Ekonomi Syari’ah, 5, 605–616. https://doi.org/10.24252/iqtishaduna.vi.50835
Fadhila, D. S., Rini, R., Firdausi, K., Melati, C. A., Sholekhah, A., Toyiba, S. N., Natasyah, M., Artama, F., Jl, A., Mas, G., Kartasura, K., Sukoharjo, K., & Tengah, J. (2025). Perlindungan Konsumen dalam Kasus Gagal Bayar Polis Asuransi Jiwasraya: Analisis Regulasi dan Peran OJK. 2.
Lizuardi, A., Sudirman, S., & Izzuddin, A. (2017). Iktikat Baik Para Pihak dalam Pelaksanaan Mediasi di Pengadilan Agama. De Jure: Jurnal Hukum Dan Syar’iah, 9(2), 63–72. https://doi.org/10.18860/j-fsh.v9i2.6807
Mardani. (2011). Hukum ekonomi syariah di Indonesia. Refika Aditama.
Marwanti, R. (2017). Peran Pengadilan Agama Kediri Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah. Jurnal Justisia Ekonomika: Magister Hukum Ekonomi Syariah, 1(01), 28–36. https://doi.org/10.30651/justeko.v1i01.1124
Nurhayati, S., & Wasilah. (2023). Akuntansi Syariah di Indonesia, Edisi 5. Penerbit Salemba.
Otoritas Jasa Keuangan. (2013). Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Nomor 1/POJK.07/2013 Tahun 2013 tentang Perlindungan Konsumen Sektor Jasa Keuangan. Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan, 1–82. Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Nomor 1/POJK.07/2013 Tahun 2013 tentang Perlindungan Konsumen Sektor Jasa Keuangan
Otoritas Jasa Keuangan. (2016). Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Nomor 69/POJK.05/2016 Tahun 2016 Penyelenggaraan Usaha Perusahaan Asuransi, Perusahaan Asuransi Syariah, Perusahaan Reasuransi, dan Perusahaan Reasuransi Syariah. Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan, 1–82. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/128416/peraturan-ojk-no-69pojk052016-tahun-2016
Putusan Pengadilan Agama Medan. (2025). Putusan PA MEDAN Nomor 198/Pdt.G/2025/PA.Mdn. https://putusan3.mahkamahagung.go.id/direktori/putusan/zaf09abd717d7678a7c5313634343439.html
Rafki, M., & Madjid, N. V. (2024). Pertimbagan Hakim Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah di Pengadilan Agama Padang Kelas IA. Ekasakti Legal Science Journal, 1(4), 355–362.
Rosidah, Z. N., & Karjoko, L. (2021). Orientasi Filosofis Hakim Pengadilan Agama Dalam Menyelesaikan Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, 28(1), 163–182. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol28.iss1.art8
Suhendar, H., & Janwari, Y. (2023). Regulation and Significance of Sharia Economic Dispute Resolution in Religious Courts (Application of Justice, Finality and Legal Certainty Aspects). Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Tambun Bungai, 20(2), 304–319.
Taufik, I. (2025). Perbedaan Pendekatan Hakim Dalam Sengketa Akad Mudharabah: Studi Kasus Putusan Pengadilan Agama Dan Pengadilan Negeri Makassar. El-Iqtishady: Jurnal Hukum Ekonomi Syariah, 7(1), 259–276.
Undang - Undang Republik Indonesia. (2006). Nomor 3 Tahun 2006 Tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 1989 Tentang Peradilan Agama.
Copyright (c) 2026 Mutia Izzatun Nurul Imamah, Darin Arif Muallifin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
