PROSES PERALIHAN WALI NASAB KE WALI HAKIM DALAM KASUSWALI ADHALMELALUI \nPENETAPANPENGADILAN AGAMA \nKELAS IB BATUSANGKAR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PROSES PERALIHAN WALI NASAB KE WALI HAKIM DALAM KASUS WALI ADHAL MELALUIPENETAPAN PENGADILAN AGAMA \nKELAS IB BATUSANGKAR \n \nYuliaRoza, NIM. 1620123053. Program Magister Kenotarian Fakultas Hukum Andalas Padang. Halaman 125 Tahun 2018. \n \n \nABSTRAK \nMajelis telah berusaha menasehati pemohon untuk mendekati dan membujuk wali pemohon (ayah pemohon) agar mau menikahkan pemohon dengan calon suami pemohon, tetapi tidak berhasil sedang pemohon menyatakan tetap ingin menikah dengan calon suami pemohon. Bahwamajelistelah pula menasehati ayah Pemohon agar bersediauntukmenjadiwalinasabanaknya, akantetapiusahatersebuttidakberhasil. BahwasetelahdibacakanPermohonanpemohon yang isinyatetapdipertahankanolehPemohon.alasanwalinasabdaricalonmempelaiperempuantidakmaumenikahkananaknyaadalahmasalahkomunikasi yang tidakterbangundenganefektif, sehinggawalinasabberasumsitidakmaumenikahkananaknyakarenatidakikutsertamendidik, mengasuhdanmembesarkan sang anak. Pertimbangan Hakim Pengadilan Agama Kelas 1B BatusangkardalamMenetapkanWaliAdhalPadaPerkaraNomor. 0081/Pdt.P/2014/PA.Bskadalahwalipemohonhadir di persidanganakantetapidiakeberatan (enggan) sebagaiwalinikahpemohon,dankeberatanwalipemohontersebuttidakberalasan, olehkarnaitumajelismenetapkanbahwawalipemohonadalahadhal (enggan). Proses pernikahan yang dilakukan di KUA dalamkasuswaliadhaladalah 1). PengirimanBerkas-Berkas yang berkaittentang data pernikahan, 2).PPN memanggilpihak-pihak yang bekepentinganseperticalonpengantin, 3). PPN Mencatattentang proses pernikahandan 4). PelaksanaanAkadNikah. \n \nKata Kunci: WaliNasab, Wali Hakim, WaliAdhal \n \n \n \n \nTHE TRANSITATION PROCESS OF THE NASAB GUARDIAN TO THE JUDGE GUARDIAN IN THE CASE OF THE ADHAL GUARDIAN IS THROUGH THE DETERMINATION OF RELIGIOUS COURT \nIB BATUSANGKAR CLASS \n \nYulia Roza, NIM. 1620123053. Kenotarian Masters Program at Andalas Law Faculty, Padang. Page 125 of 2018. \n \nABSTRACT \nBackground problem in Case Number. 0081 / Pdt.P / 2014 / PA.Bsk was triggered because the assembly had tried to advise the applicant to approach and persuade the applicant's guardian (the applicant's father) to marry the applicant's marriage with the applicant's husband, that the council also advised the Petitioner's father to be a guardian Nasab's child, but the attempt was unsuccessful. The formulation of the problem in this study is about the reasons for the patronage of the prospective bride not to marry off her child, consideration of the Judge of the Class 1B Religious Court Batusangkar in determining Guardian Adhal in Case Number. 0081 / Pdt.P / 2014 / PA.Bsk and the marriage process conducted in KUA in the case of guardian adhal. The type of approach used in this study is a normative juridical and juridical, empirical juridical approach, meaning data obtained by referring to the empirical juridical aspects used as a tool. So the juridical empirical approach in this study is that in analyzing the problem carried out by integrating legal materials (secondary data) with primary data obtained in the field. While the normative juridical approach is a method of legal research conducted by examining library material or mere secondary data.This research is descriptive analysis, is to provide the data studied as closely as possible about humans, circumstances or other symptoms. This research is descriptive analysis, is to provide the data studied as closely as possible about humans, circumstances or other symptoms. the population in this study is each determination of the Batusangkar IB Class Religion Court relating to the determination of the judge's guardian as a marriage guardian because of the presence of adhal Guardian. The results showed that the reason for the patronage of the prospective bride did not want to marry her child was a problem of communication that was not built effectively, so the guardian assumed he would not marry his child because he did not participate in educating, nurturing and raising the child and also because the guardian had conflict internal with the mother of the child. Consideration of Judges of the Class 1B Religious Court Batusangkar in Appointing Guardian Adhal in Case Number. 0081 / Pdt.P / 2014 / PA.Bsk is the guardian of the applicant present at the hearing but he objected (reluctantly) as the applicant's marriage guardian, and the objection of the applicant's guardian was unwarranted, because of that the assembly stipulated that the applicant's guardian was adhal (reluctant) . The marriage process carried out in KUA in the case of a guardian is 1). Delivery of files related to marriage data, 2). PPN calls on interested parties such as brides and grooms, 3). PPN Records about the marriage process and 4). Implementation of Marriage Agreement. \nKeywords: Nasab Guardian, Judge Guardian, Adhal Guardian
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.072 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".