The closing chapter weighs things up: what KHI does well, what is criticized, how it compares with the classical track, and what an honest recommendation for the reader is.
Strengths (what it does well)
- Legal certainty. A single uniform formulation makes the judge’s job easier, reduces the chaos caused by sharp differences between madzhab in the courtroom, and yields a predictable result.
- Answers real social problems. Harta bersama acknowledges the wife’s contribution; substitute heirs and wasiat wajibah try to protect the orphaned grandchild and the adopted child, who are socially vulnerable.
- Room for deliberation. Pasal 183 recognizes amicable settlement, in keeping with Indonesia’s family tradition, as long as every party knows their rights.
- Rooted in faraidh. Most of its framework remains the Qur’anic furudh, not a foreign system.
Weaknesses / criticism (the honest ones)
- Substitute heirs (Pasal 185) depart from the rule of hajb. The majority of scholars judge that making a grandchild a full heir while a child is still alive contradicts the principle that “the nearer bars the farther.” This is the foremost criticism.
- The automatic 50:50 separation of harta bersama has no explicit basis in faraidh; some accept it as ‘urf/syirkah, some judge its automatic nature to be excessive.
- Expanding wasiat wajibah through jurisprudence (e.g. to a non-Muslim heir) goes beyond the text and creates uncertainty.
- The status of an “Inpres” rather than a statute leaves an open legal-order debate about how binding it is.
Comparison with the classical track
| Criterion | Classical fiqh | KHI |
|---|---|---|
| Fidelity to the evidence | High (that is its aim) | Partial; some articles are ijtihad without strong precedent |
| Certainty & uniformity | Low (many disagreements) | High |
| Applicability in RI courts | Not directly | Yes, this is what is used |
| Protection of vulnerable parties | Through voluntary bequest | Through a mandatory mechanism |
| Acceptance by Ahlussunnah scholars | High | Partial; some articles rejected |
Which viewpoint to choose, and when:
- To understand the law of Allah according to the evidence → the classical track (the four other bundles).
- To predict/face a court ruling in Indonesia → this KHI track.
Recommendation
- Learn both. Indonesian Muslims should understand the classical computation (the religious side) and KHI (the state-law side), then know where the two differ.
- Prioritize deliberation that knows the rights. If a family can reach an amicable settlement (Pasal 183 / tasaluh) after each party knows their shar’i share, that is a spacious path recognized by both law and religion.
- For points of disagreement (especially substitute heirs), return to those qualified. Ask an ustadz/masyayikh of Ahlussunnah for the religious side; for legal validation, the process is at the Pengadilan Agama.
- Do not treat this site as a fatwa. It is a map and a learning tool, not a decider.
Honest conclusion: KHI is an earnest effort to organize inheritance law for a nation, with the strengths of certainty and social sensitivity, but it contains some ijtihad that is not agreed upon by the scholars. Presenting it here is a form of legal literacy, not an endorsement of every one of its articles.
Source: academic studies of the pros and cons of Pasal 185 & 209; articles from Badilag of the Mahkamah Agung; chapters 03 through 08 of this bundle. Details in chapter 12.