Kepuasan Pengguna Sulh Di Mahkamah Syariah Selangor | FAKULTI EKOLOGI MANUSIA
» ARTIKEL » Kepuasan Pengguna Sulh di Mahkamah Syariah Selangor

Kepuasan Pengguna Sulh di Mahkamah Syariah Selangor

Pertambahan kadar perceraian, ketidakpuasan umum terhadap aspek prosedur undang-undang dan peruntukan yang bertujuan menggalakkan perdamaian yang tidak berkesan, menyebabkan mekanisme alternatif bagi membantu pihak yang bertikai menangani pertikaian dalam keluarga mereka diperkenalkan. Mekanisme alternatif ini dikenali sebagai mediasi keluarga atau sulh dalam undang-undang Islam. Mediasi atau sulh menekankan tentang penyelesaian pertikaian secara baik yang menggunakan pendekatan keadaan menang-menang.

Kajian ini bertujuan pertamanya, untuk menentukan perkaitan antara ciri demografi pengguna sulh dengan kepuasan terhadap sulh, dan keduanya, perbezaan dalam kepuasan terhadap sulh antara pengguna lelaki dan perempuan. Responden kajian ini terdiri daripada pengguna lelaki dan perempuan yang dipilih secara bertujuan daripada fail kes sulh di Mahkamah Syariah Selangor yang terpilih. Mahkamah yang terpilih mewakili zon geografi di negeri Selangor: Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Sabak Bernam, Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Kuala Selangor, Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Sepang, Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Bandaraya Shah Alam dan Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Hulu Langat. Sebanyak 250 borang soal selidik telah diedarkan secara mel kepada responden. Setiap borang soal selidik disertakan dengan surat iringan yang menjelaskan tentang objektif kajian, dan menegaskan tentang kerahsiaan jawapan dan aspek sukarela dalam menjawab soal selidik tersebut. Sampul surat beralamat sendiri juga disediakan bagi setiap responden untuk tujuan pemulangan semula borang soal selidik kepada pengkaji. Poskad peringatan dihantar keseluruh sampel selepas satu bulan pengedaran borang soal selidik. Sebanyak 128 borang soal selidik telah diterima semula oleh pengkaji menjadikan kadar jawapan 51.2 peratus. Menurut Babbie (1990) dan Hager (2003), pemulangan 50 peratus borang soal selidik yang dihantar secara mel sudah mencukupi sebagai kaedah meminimumkan non-response bias.

Hasil kajian menunjukkan tiada perkaitan antara ciri demografi dengan kepuasan terhadap sulh. Majoriti (87 peratus) responden melaporkan mereka sangat berpuas hati dengan sulh walaupun tidak semua pertikian Berjaya diselesaikan. Responden lelaki didapati mempunyai kepuasan yang lebih tinggi terhadap sulh berbanding dengan responden perempuan. Hasil kajian mempunyai implikasi bahawa sulh merupakan mekanime penyelesaian pertikaian alternatf di Mahkamah Syariah yang berdaya maju di mana pertikaian berjaya diselesaikan secara baik.

 

References/Rujukan

Amato, P. R. (2010). Research on divorce: Continuing trends and new developments. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72 (3), 650-666.

Ananat, E.O. & Michaels, G. (June 2008). The effect of marital breakup on the income distribution of women with childrenJ. Human Resources, 43,611-620.

Babbie, Earl. (1999). The basics of social research. USA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Beck, C.J. & Sales, B. (2001). Family mediation: facts, myths and future prospect. USA: American Psychological Association.

Bikerdike, A. (2003). The voice of the client: key findings from a national outcome evaluation of relationship counseling and mediation service. Steps forward for families research, practice and policy conference, Australian Institute of Family Studies. 

Bigne, E., Moliner, M. A., & Sanchez, J. (2003). Perceived quality and satisfaction in multi service organizations: The case of Spanish public services. The Journal of Services Marketing17 (4), 420-442.

Bordow, S. & Gibson, J. (1994). Evaluation of the family court mediation service, Family Court of Australia, Research Report, No.12. Chelvarajah, R. R. (2000). The Malaysian Bar Council: Family Court. Retrieved from http://www.malaysianbar.org, dated September 14, 2006.

Conneely, S. (2002). Family mediation in Ireland. England: Ashgate-Dartmouth Publishing Co Ltd.

Devaraj, P.E. (2002). The Women’s Crisis Centre, Penang: Research in Divorce in Penang High Court. Retrieved from http://www.wccpenang.org, dated September 14, 2006.

Douglas, G. & Murch, M. (2002). Taking account of children's needs in divorce - A study of family solicitors' responses to new policy and practiceinitiatives. Child and Family Law Quarterly4 (1), 57-76.

Emery, R. E. (2012). Renegotiating Family Relationship: Divorce, Child Custody and Mediation. (3rd ed) . New York: The Guildford Press.

Emery, R. E., Sbarra, D., & Grover, T. (January 2005). Divorce mediation: research and reflections. Family Court Review43 (1), 22-37.

Emery, R. E., Laumann-Billings, L., Waldron, W. C., Sbarra, D.A., & Dillon, P. (2001). Child custody mediation and litigation: Further evidence of the differing views of mothers and fathers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69 (2), 323-332. Evaluation study on the pilot scheme on family mediation: Final report. Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Retrieved from http//:www. Judiciary.gov,hk/en/publications/hkpu_finalreport.pdf, dated 1 October 10, 2007.

Kelly, J. B. (2001). Issues facing the family mediation field. PepperdineDispute Resolution Law Journal, 1 (1), Art. 5.

Kelly, J. B. (1996). A decade of divorce mediation research: Some answers and questions. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 34, 373-385.

Kelly, J. B. (Fall 1990). Is mediation less expensive? A comparison of mediated and adversarial divorce. Mediation Quarterly(1). Kelly, J. B. & Duryee, M. A. (1992). Women's and men's views of mediation in voluntary and mandatory mediation settings. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 30, 34-49.

Kelly, J. B. (1989). Mediated and adversarial divorce: Respondents' perceptions of their processes and outcomes. Mediation Quarterly, 24, 71-88

Kim, D. & Oka, T (2011). Divorce law reforms and divorce rates in the U.S.: An interactive fixed effects approach. Retrieved from http:people.virginia.edu/~dk4p/UnilateralDivorceLaw pdf, dated September 14, 2012

Kitzmann, K. M., Parra, G. R., & Jobe-Shields, L. (January 2012). A Review of programs designed to prepare parents for custody and visitation mediation.Family Court Review, 50 (1), 128-136.

Kotler, P. & Clarke, R. N (1987). Marketing for Health Care Organizations. Englewood Cliffs: NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kuhner, T. K. (2005). Court-connected mediation compared: The cases of Argentina and the United States. ILSA Journal of International andComparative Law, 11 (3), 519.

McMutty, S, L. & Hudson, W. H. (September 2000). The client satisfaction inventory: Result of an initial validation study. Research of Social Work Practice10 (5), 644.

Moloney, L, Fisher, T, Love, A., & Ferguson, S(1995). Federally funded family mediation in Melbourne: Outcomes, costs and client satisfaction, AGPS, Canberra.

Moloney, L, Fisher, T, Love, A., & Ferguson, S(1996). Managing differences: Federally funded family mediation in Sidney: Outcomes, costs and client satisfaction, AGPS, Canberra.

Oliver, R. L. (2010). Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, (2nd ed). New York: M.E. Sharpe

Pearson, J. & Thoennes, N. (1986). Mediation in custody dispute. Behavioral Sciences and the Law(2), 203-215.

Rad, A. M. M. & Yarmohammadian, M. H. (2006). A study of relationship between managers’ leadership style and employees’ job satisfaction. Leadership in Health Services19(2), 11-28.

Raihanah Azhari (2005). Sulh dalam perundangan Islam: Kajian di Jabatan Kehakiman Islam Selangor, Ph.D. thesis, Akademi Pengajian Islam Universiti Malaya.

Sa’odah, A. & Nora, A. H. (2010). Provisions on sulh and its application in the state of Selangor. In Mohammad Naqib Ishan Jan & Ashgar Ali Ali Mohamed. Mediation in Malaysia: The Law and Practice. Kuala Lumpur: LexisNexis.

Sa’odah, A. & Nora, A.H. (2010a). Sulh (mediation) in the state of Selangor: An analysis of legal provisions and application. International Islamic University Law Journal18 (2), 213-237

Sa’odah, A. & Nora, A.H. (2010b). Family mediation and sulh: An alternative dispute resolution in Malaysia, International Journal of Social Policy and Society7, 66-79.

Sullivan, B. F., Schwebel, A., Lind, J. S., & Shimberg, J. (1997). Parties' evaluations of their relationships with their mediators and accomplishments in a court-connected mediation program. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 35, 405-417.

Trost, M, R., Braver, S. L., & Schoeneman, R. (1988). Mandatory mediation: encouraging results for the court system. Conciliation Courts Rreview26 (2), 59-65.

Wall, J. A. & Dunne, T. C (April 2012). Mediation Research: A Current Review. Negotiation Journal, 28 (2), 217-244

Welsh. N, A. (Spring 2012).The Current Transitional State of Court- Connected Adr. Marquette Law Review, 95 (3), 873-886

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tarikh Input: 13/02/2019 | Kemaskini: 13/02/2019 | rozlita

PERKONGSIAN MEDIA

FAKULTI EKOLOGI MANUSIA
Universiti Putra Malaysia
43400 UPM Serdang
Selangor Darul Ehsan
03.9769 7051
03.8943 5385
C1600623011