Negotiating Islamic Law and Customary Practice: Fiqh al-Aqalliyyat and Restorative Justice in Banjar Inheritance Disputes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inheritance disputes in Banjar customary society extend beyond material distribution and are closely connected to kinship relations, moral obligations, and communal harmony. When such disputes are resolved exclusively through state law, particularly the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI), the outcomes often fail to accommodate the social and cultural realities of indigenous Muslim communities. Formal litigation, with its adversarial structure and procedural rigidity, may intensify conflict rather than restore family relationships. This study adopts a normative legal research design using conceptual, doctrinal, and comparative approaches to examine Banjar customary inheritance mechanisms, namely bacu’ur (genealogical tracing), basuluh (moral and religious consultation), and bapatut (consensus-based deliberation). These mechanisms are analyzed through the perspectives of restorative justice and fiqh al-aqalliyyat as frameworks of contextual Islamic legal reasoning. The analysis relies on primary legal sources, including the 1945 Constitution, the KHI, and legislation on alternative dispute resolution, as well as secondary literature from legal anthropology and restorative justice studies, without employing empirical methods. The findings indicate that the Banjar karakatan system embodies restorative justice principles such as dialogue, collective responsibility, and relational repair. From the perspective of fiqh al-aqalliyyat, these practices constitute legitimate forms of Islamic legal reasoning that prioritize maslahah, islah, and social cohesion within plural legal settings. This study argues that Banjar customary inheritance resolution offers a normatively grounded model for integrating Islamic law, customary practices, and restorative justice within Indonesia’s alternative dispute resolution framework, contributing to broader debates on legal pluralism and the contextual application of Islamic law.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it