The Urgency of the Expiration of Joint Property Lawsuits in the Perspective of Legal Philosophy: An Effort to Unravel the Fragmentation of Juridical Rationality for Evidence (Comparative Study in Indonesia and Malaysia)

Abstract

The absence of a limitation period for filing joint property claims within the Indonesian legal system generates significant juridical and practical problems, particularly concerning legal certainty, evidentiary effectiveness, and the fragmentation of rationality within the jurisdiction of religious courts. In contrast, Malaysia has implemented a clear limitation period in resolving harta sepencarian disputes, thereby preventing legal uncertainty and the risk of evidence deterioration. This study employs a normative juridical approach and comparative analysis by examining statutory regulations, legal doctrines, and court decisions in both countries. The findings indicate that the urgency of establishing a limitation period can be philosophically justified through the theory of legal certainty and the fundamental values of law articulated by Gustav Radbruch and Hans Kelsen. Juridically, time limitation serves as an instrument to safeguard legal certainty and equality before the law. An ideal model may be formulated through the harmonization of positive law and the principle of maslahah in Islamic family law, balancing substantive justice with formal legal certainty. Therefore, Indonesia should consider adopting a limitation period for joint property claims as a form of family law reform.