RECEPTION OF THE MARRIAGE AGREEMENT IN THE WEDDING AGREEMENT THE SERIES: BETWEEN MORAL NORMS, MARRIAGE LAW, AND THE COMPILATION OF ISLAMIC LAW

Abstract

The film Wedding Agreement (2019) received a positive response from viewers. Likewise, the version of Wedding Agreement The Series (WATS) which airs every Friday on Netflix, Viu, and Youtube since March 25, 2022. The WATS film presents a marriage agreement that is different from Law No. 1/1974 concerning Marriage and the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI). Article 29 paragraphs (1)-(4) of Law 1/1974 stipulates that the agreement is made before the contract, but in WATS, the agreement is made after the contract. The Marriage Law stipulates that the agreement must not conflict with religious norms and morality. Meanwhile, the agreement in WATS contains the following problems: the abolition of the wife's obligation to her husband; the refusal of the husband's permission for the wife to carry out public activities; restrictions on access to residential rooms; and agreeing to divorce after one year. From this fact, it can be stated that the practice of WATS marriage agreements is not in accordance with the norms of the Marriage Law and KHI. Then, how does the audience perceive the practice of the marriage agreement? This article examines the audience reception of the practice of marriage agreements in WATS with the theory of the Stuart Hall reception. The research was conducted in Lampung and Yogyakarta. The findings: there are three reception patterns, namely accepting, negotiating, and rejecting. In general, the audience is aware that the practice of marriage agreements in WATS violates the norms of decency and decency, but they doubt whether it violates the law or not. This is because the documents were made by both parties with sufficient stamp duty. Respondents are bound by the understanding that the seal is a valid document in the eyes of the law. The majority of respondents stated that the practice of WATS was not in line with Islamic law, but did not dare to expressly state that it was contradictory. This attitude rests on sympathy for Tari, an oppressed female character, not on an adequate understanding of Islamic law.