Penyelesaian Sengketa Perbankan Syari'ah Sesuai Isi Akad Berdasarkan Ketentuan Undang-Undang No 21 Tahun 2008 Tentang Perbankan Syari'ah Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No 93/PUU-X/2012

Abstract

Since a contract made by Sharia banking is on the foundation of Islamic Laws, whenever there is any dispute, the religious jurisdiction institution should rightfully be entrusted the absolute authority to settle the dispute over economic Sharia which all parties involved are Muslims and/ or voluntarily obey the Islamic Laws. The Law No. 21/ 2008 concerning Sharia Banking is principally the legal umbrella for Sharia banking institutions; in determining the way to settle the sharia banking dispute, the provisions are stipulated in Article 55 Paragraph (1), (2). and (3) of Law No. 21/ 2008 concerning Sharia Banking. Therefore, this research was aimed at studying the factors of why the Law by the District Court is til referred as an alternative settlement for the sharia banking disputes, why the Constitutional Court through the Verdict No, 93/PUU-X/2012 abolished the provisions stipulated in Article 55 Paragraph (2) of Law No, 21/ 2008 concerning Sharia Banking, and how about the settlement of the Sharia Banking disputes in accordance with the contract contents after the Constitutional Court Verdict No. 93/PUU-X/2012.

The research applied normative legal research (doctrinal) method with Analytical description which described and analyzed the settlement for the Sharia Banking disputes in accordance with the contract contents in the post Constitutional Court's Verdict No. 93/PUU-X/2012. It also used the statute approach and analytical approach. The statute approach was used because the resolution for the Sharia disputes which are in accordance with the contract contents, the subject of this research, was the Law on Sharia Banking and the Constitutional Court's Verdict No, 93/PUU-X/2012, while the analytical approach was used in order to find out the settlement for the Sharia Banking disputes after the Constitutional Court Verdict No 93/PUU-X/2012.