Muhammadiyah Cadres Challenge Religious Courts Law on Isbat and Hisab Method at Constitutional Court

The Constitutional Court (MK) held a preliminary hearing on Tuesday (9/6/2026) for a judicial review of Law Number 3 of 2006 concerning Amendments to Law Number 7 of 1989 on Religious Courts. The lawsuit focuses on the constitutionality of the isbat mechanism for the start and end of Ramadan, which is deemed discriminatory against users of the hisab method. The petition was filed by three Muhammadiyah cadres: Andri Sumarna, Muhammad Fajri Nur Rizky, and Rozak Daud. They are challenging Article 52A and its elucidation in the Religious Courts Law, which they believe contradicts the 1945 Constitution. Article 52A of the Religious Courts Law states that the religious courts provide isbat for testimony of rukyat hilal in determining the beginning of Hijri months. However, the applicants highlighted the elucidation of the article, which grants the Minister of Religious Affairs the authority to nationally determine 1 Ramadan and 1 Syawal based on rukyat isbat. According to the applicants, this legal construction causes the rukyat hilal method to receive official state recognition, whilst the hisab method they adhere to does not obtain equal standing. This is considered to create legal uncertainty and discriminatory treatment in performing worship. Juanda, the applicants’ legal counsel, stated that the difference in substance between the body of Article 52A and the Elucidation of Article 52A creates an inconsistency of norms. He explained that an elucidation should only serve as interpretation, not add new norms or narrow the scope of the law. In this case, the elucidation is considered to narrow the scope of the Hijri year to only Ramadan and Syawal, and to add authority to the Minister of Religious Affairs not contained in the body of the article. The hearing was chaired by Chief Justice Suhartoyo, with panel members Constitutional Justices M. Guntur Hamzah and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh. The judges provided several notes for improving the petition. Justice M. Guntur Hamzah suggested the applicants sharpen their legal standing and strengthen the posita of their petition, while Justice Daniel Yusmic asked them to be more careful in aligning the articles under review with the petitum submitted. Chief Justice Suhartoyo specifically asked the applicants to prove the real loss suffered from the norm in the Religious Courts Law, particularly regarding the hisab method related to the isbat hearing. The court granted the applicants time to revise their petition before the case proceeds to the next stage.