Dasar Pertimbangan Hakim dalam Penetapan Status Hukum Permohonan Subjek Transgender

Abstract

This study aims to identify the judge’s legal reasoning in determining the legal status of a transgender petition and the legal implications following its rejection. The research employs a normative legal method using statutory and case study approaches. Data were obtained through document studies of Law No. 23 of 2006 on Population Administration, Court Decision No. 77/Pdt.P/2014/PN.Kln., and relevant legal literature. The analysis links case facts to the principles of justice, legal certainty, and utility. The findings show that the judge’s reasoning does not reflect the principle of justice, which should serve as a fundamental guideline. The judge also failed to consider similar previous cases, resulting in legal inconsistency. Consequently, the principles of justice, certainty, and utility are neglected. The rejection of the petition leads to obstacles in fulfilling transgender individuals’ civil rights, particularly in marriage recognition and inheritance distribution. This study recommends that judges prioritize the principles of justice, legal certainty, and utility by taking similar rulings into account.