Legality of Rukyat al-Hilal Witness Without Oath in Fiqh and Procedural Law Perspectives

Abstract

This article analyzes the legal status of rukyat al-hilal witnesses in determining the Hijri month, with a focus on Ramadan 1446 H. In this case, the sighting of the new moon in Lhoknga, Aceh Besar, was reported by experienced observers and supported with visual documentation. However, the Syariah Court rejected the testimony because the witness was an outsider who had not taken an oath, and instead relied on local residents who had not seen the hilal. Conversely, the Ministry of Religious Affairs recognized the beginning of Ramadan based on the testimony of the non-sworn outsider. This raises two key issues: whether local residents who did not observe the hilal can serve as witnesses, and whether outside experts may be accepted under Indonesian procedural law and Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh). The study finds that the court applied relative competence too rigidly, a principle more relevant to private cases such as marriage or inheritance. Unlike those, rukyat al-hilal has national implications. While procedurally the ministerial decree is flawed, from a fiqh perspective the decision remains legitimate, since fiqh only requires a Muslim’s trustworthy testimony without the necessity of a judicial oath.