Marriage Law Regarding Husband's Alimony Obligation Challenged, Petitioner Claims it Creates Loophole for Exploitation

JAKARTA — The Marriage Law Number 1 of 1974, specifically regarding a husband’s obligations under Article 34, Paragraph 1, is being viewed as a loophole for material exploitation within the household. This was stated by the petitioner of case number 159/PUU-XXIV/2026 in the grounds for the judicial review of the Marriage Law at the Constitutional Court (MK).

“That the unilateral burden of obligation becomes a loophole for material exploitation within the household,” the lawsuit stated, as reported on Monday (18/5/2026).

According to the petitioner, this constitutes a violation of the constitutional rights under Article 28G, Paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution, which states: Every person has the right to the protection of their personal self, family, honour, dignity, and property under their control, as well as the right to security and protection from threats of fear to do or not do something that constitutes a human right.

“This unbalanced norm is frequently exploited and used as an instrument of justification for wives to drain the husband’s material assets with bad faith,” the petitioner said.

Husbands who are legally compelled by the state to bear all costs are deemed vulnerable to extortion, the neglect of their human rights, and the arbitrary seizure of their property.

Consequently, in the petition’s prayer, the petitioner requests that the Constitutional Court amend the aforementioned articles to state: “Husbands and wives have a mutual and reciprocal obligation to protect and respect one another, to provide all the necessities of household life, and to manage household affairs proportionally in order to realise a marriage that is a partnership of equals based on sincere love.”