Skripsi ini berjudul “Kebijakan Ketua Pengadilan Agama dalam Kasus Prodeo (Bantuan Hukum Secara Cuma-Cuma)(Studi Kasus di Pengadilan Agama Blitar). Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui prosedur pemberian prodeo di pengadilan Agama Blitar dan kebijakan ketua Pengadilan Agama Blitar dalam memberikan izin berperkara secara prodeo.Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode kualitatif untuk jenis penelitian lapangan (field research),yang bersifat deskriptif analisis, jenis data yang digunakan adalah data primer dan data sekunder yang berkaitan dengan penelitian penulis yakni prodeo,teknik pengumpulan data yaitu dengan wawancara dan dokumentasi. Hasil dari penelitian ini bahwa prosedur pemberian Prodeo di Pengadilan Agama Blitar ada beberapa langkah yaitu penggugat mengajukan gugatan disertai surat keterangan tidak mampu kepada Pengadilan Agama Blitar, kemudian adanya wawancara seputar ketidak mampuannya dari panitera, jika ketidak mampuannya dapat dibuktikan maka Ketua Pengadilan Agama Blitar mengeluarkan surat penetapan, jika tidak dikabulkan maka mengajukan ulang gugatan dari awal. Ketua Pengadilan Agama Blitar menyimpulkan PERMA No. 1 Tahun 2014 Pasal (1) ayat (4) tidak menentukan perkara yang boleh diajukan Prodeo maka perkara yang menjadi kewenangan Pengadilan Agama Blitar dapat diajukan Prodeo, terdapat dalam pasal 49 UU No. 50 Tahun 2009 perubahan (UU No. 3 Tahun 2006 dan UU No. 7 Tahun 1989) tentang Peradilan Agama, Ketua Pengadilan Agama Blitar berwenang memeriksa berkas termasuk surat keterangan tidak mampu dari Kepala Desa/Lurah setempat, atas pertimbangan Panitera, Ketua Pengadilan Agama Blitar akan mengeluarkan surat penetapan jika prodeo dikabulkan. Kata Kunci : Ketua Pengadilan Agama, Prodeo

This research entitled “The Policy of The Head of Religious Court in Prodeo’s Case (A Free Legal Aid) (A Case in Blitar Religious Court). This research aimed to know the procedure of prodeo’s provision in Blitar Religious Court and the policy of the head of religious court in giving permission to do prodeo litigants. The methodology for this research was qualitative method by using field research in which the analysis was descriptive. Meanwhile, the data for this research were primer and seconder that were related with the author’s research prodeo. The Data collection was done by using interview and documentation. The result was there were some procedures of giving prodeo in this Blitar Religious Court, 1) the plaintiff filed a lawsuit using Not Capable Certificate 2) there were an interview about the inability from the clerk, if the inability were able to be proven, the head of Blitar Religious Court would give the decree. However, if it was declined by the head of Blitar Religious Court, then there would be a re-submission of the lawsuit. The head of Blitar Religious Court concluded PERMA No. 1 2014 in article (1) paragraph (4) does not stipulate the case which may be field by the prodeo then the case which is the jurisdiction of the Blitar Religious Court can be filed for prodeo. Article 49 UU No. 50 2009 with the change (UU No. 3 2006 and UU No. 7 1989) about Religious Court, The head of Blitar religious court authorized to check the file including Not Capable Certificate from head of sub-district/village from the recommendation of clerks. The head of Blitar religious court will give decree if the prodeo is granted. Key words: The head of Religious court, prodeo

Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal