Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk melihat bagaimana dampak Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 93/PUU-X/2012 terhadap kewenangan Pengadilan Agama dalam menyelesaikan sengketa ekonomi syariah serta mengetahui bagaimana kesiapan hakim di Pengadilan Agama Surabaya dalam menangani sengketa ekonomi syariah pasca lahirnya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 93/PUU-X/2012. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian field research atau studi lapangan yang bersifat deskriptif analitis. Sumber data primer yang digunakan berupa narasumber atau informan yaitu Hakim Pengadilan Agama Surabaya. Sumber data sekunder yang merupakan data tambahan atau data pendukung yang berupa Undang-undang, buku atau literatur, jurnal atau karya ilmiah, serta referensi dan data pendukung lainnya yang berkaitan dengan judul penelitian. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa kewenangan pengadilan agama dalam menyelesaikan sengketa ekonomi syariah pasca lahirnya putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 93/PUU-X/2012 bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 serta tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat” kini mutlak menjadi kewenangan pengadilan agama dan tidak ada lagi dualisme (choice of forum) lagi, kecuali tercantum klausula arbitrase maka Pengadilan Agama menyatakan tidak berwenang namun selama tidak ada klausula arbitrase maka mutlak kewenangan Pengadilan Agama dalam menyelesaikan sengketa ekonomi syariah. Selain itu mengenai kesiapan hakim dalam menangani dan menyelesaikan sengketa ekonomi syariah pasca putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tersebut para hakim Pengadilan Agama Surabaya secara keilmuan sudah siap akan tetapi dari segi pengalaman belum sepenuhnya siap. Dari 23 hakim di Pengadilan Agama Surabaya yang rata-rata sudah bergelar Doktor, 8 hakim sudah bersertifikat hakim ekonomi syari’ah. Kata Kunci : Pengadilan Agama, Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah, Hakim.

This study aims to look at how the impact of Constitutional Court Decision No. 93 / PUU-X / 2012 against its jurisdiction to resolve disputes Islamic economics as well as knowing how the readiness of judges in the Religious Surabaya in handling disputes sharia economy after the birth of the Constitutional Court Decision No. 93 / PUU -X / 2012. This study uses field research study or field study is a descriptive analysis. The primary data source used in the form informant or informants Religious Court Judge Surabaya. Secondary data sources that are additional data or supporting data in the form of the Act, or literature books, journals or scientific works, as well as references and other supporting data relating to the title of the study. The results of this study indicate that the authority of religious courts in resolving the dispute of the sharia economy after the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 93 / PUU-X / 2012 is contradictory to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and has no binding legal force "is now absolute authority of religious courts and there is no longer a dualism (choice of forum) anymore, unless the arbitration clause arises, the Religious Court declares that it is not authorized but as long as there is no arbitration clause, it is the absolute authority of the Religious Courts to resolve the dispute over sharia economy. In addition on the readiness of judges in handling and resolving disputes Islamic economics post decision of the Constitutional Court judges scientifically Surabaya Islamic Court was ready but in terms of experience is not yet fully ready. Of the 23 judges in Surabaya Islamic Court which on average had a doctoral degree, 8 judges was certified judges Shari'ah economy. Keywords: Islamic Court, Dispute Islamic Economics, Judge.

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