Reconstruction of Mediation Regulations in the Settlement of Divorce Cases in Courts Based on the Value of Justice

Mediation as one of the efforts to resolve disputes is expected to become an alternative to avoid divorce, which is detrimental to both parties. However, despite being regulated under the Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) No. 1 of 2016 on Mediation Procedures in Courts, the implementation of mediation has not been optimal and often results in unfair outcomes in divorce cases. This research aims to examine mediation regulations in divorce cases in court with a focus on the values of justice and the weaknesses in the implementation of these regulations. The research method used is a normative legal method by conducting a literature study to collect secondary data, and this research uses a constructivist paradigm. The results of the study indicate that mediation in divorce cases in Indonesia plays an important role in creating peaceful dispute resolution. However, the provisions regarding the obligation to be physically present and strict time limits in Perma No. 1 of 2016 are often inconsistent with social realities and the needs of the parties involved, particularly vulnerable groups such as persons with disabilities and victims of domestic violence (DV). This study reveals that existing regulations do not fully reflect the values of humanity, social justice, and wise deliberation according to Pancasila and the principles of justice as outlined by Imam Ghazali. A reconstruction of Article 6 Paragraph 1 and Article 24 Paragraph 2 of Perma No. 1 of 2016 is necessary to provide flexibility regarding physical presence and the duration of mediation, in order to create a more inclusive and fair process. This study also emphasizes the importance of changing the mindset of the public and legal officials so that mediation can be more effective and run in accordance with the principles of substantive justice.