THE CONTINUITY AND CHANGE OF DIYAT AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO ISLAMIC CRIMINAL SANCTIONS IN UNDHANG-UNDHANG BANTĚN DURING THE 17TH – 18TH CENTURIES

This research emphasizes the shift from the archaic trend of applying corporal punishment to other types of humane punishment in pre-modern periods. This phenomenon occurred not only in the Western world but also in the Eastern and Islamic worlds. One of them was the criminal law contained in the Banten Law (UUB), which was implemented in the Banten sultanate between the 18th and 19th centuries. Islamic criminal law in the form of qisas and hudud sanctions was no longer applied in Banten, but was replaced with more humane fines or diyat sanctions. Was the criminal law reform in the sultanate of Banten influenced by developments in Western law? One of the explanations given in the UUB was that the sultan of Banten employed the view of the Maliki school of thought, which allowed the ruler the right to impose takzir on criminal cases that had been resolved by Islamic law sanctions. The legal case for using diyat sanctions instead of qisas and hudud punishments was more substantial if takzir punishment was employed. This study used data in the form of UUB manuscript (single text) with the code number LOr 5598. The legal texts in UUB were analyzed using a legal social history approach. This study concludes that the application of law in UUB has dogmatic reasons for Islamic criminal law and the interests of siyasa syar'yah.

Studi ini menyoroti pergeseran dari tren penjatuhan hukuman menyakiti fisik yang dianggap biadab kepada bentuk sanksi lain yang manusiawi di jaman pra modern. Ternyata fenomena ini tidak saja terjadi di belahan dunia Barat The threat of punishment regulated in the UUM was greatly different from the material content of the UUB, which completely abolished the criminal sanction of bodily harm. Sultan Abun Nasr Abdul Kahhar or Sultan Haji (1672)(1673)(1674)(1675)(1676)(1677)(1678)(1679)(1680)(1681)(1682)(1683)(1684)(1685)(1686)(1687), who led after the golden era of Banten in the era of Sultan Abul Mafahir and Sultan Tirtayasa, pioneered the abolition of criminal sanctions for bodily harm and replaced them with fines. The three Banten sultans underwent a transition period from Hindu-Shiwa to Islam, which was marked by the incorporation of the title of sultan in front of their names. After receiving recognition from the Ottoman Empire, the UUB was officially applied as the constitution of the Islamic sultanate of Banten.
There were several reasons why UUB ought to be incorporated into a constitution or written law. First, in the introduction of the UUB text, it was stated repeatedly that the purpose of the promulgation of UUB was to create and control conditions of security and order within the empire. Second, there was a detailed systematic writing of legal material in the UUB text. Third, general law terms such as kinaun (kanun) and kapidana (criminal) appeared in the UUB text, as well as the term the power to impose criminal sanctions, known as "bumi" (state).

Ayang Utriza Yakin expressed a similar viewpoint in his article "Undhang-Undhang
Bantěn: A 17 th to 18 th century Legal Compilation of the Qadi Court of the Sultanate of Bantěn" 2 . Ayang Utriza, without mentioning the UUB Material, explained that the function of the judge/qadi as a mouthpiece for laws had already been practiced during the Banten sultanate era when the qadi with the title Kiyahi Pĕqih Najmuddin did not do ijtihad but only implemented the UUB. This opinion corroborated his previous findings, which he published in an article titled"The Register of the Qadi Court "Kiyahi Pĕqih Najmuddin" of the Sultanate of Banten, 1754-1756CE" (2015. Ayang Utriza criticized Liaw Yock Fang (1976: 178) who argued that the word "kanun" in Malay sultanate laws was only interpreted as written customary law. He criticized Eastern scientists who agreed with Jean Gaudement (1996: 3-16) that all customary laws written before the 7th century lacked a law or constitution. He agreed with Jean-Louis Gazzaniga (1997: 71-80) that written customary law could be judged as law if it was planned, systematic, and comprehensive. UUB was a legal document that considered codification thinking that was systematic, orderly, and planned. As a result, UUB, according to Ayang Utriza, was a type of constitution and law. 2 Yakin. which stated "Quion potest solver poenam in aere, luat in corpora", which means that "whoever is unable to pay must pay off with bodily suffering", which is the imprisonment and physical sanctions as the substitute of fine. The other adage also stated, "Quaelibet poena corporalis, quanvis minima, majorest quaelibet poena pecuniaria", which means that "however light a corporal punishment is, it will be heavier than a fine". 4 What is important to understand about the UUB is that there was no prison sentence, only the banishment outside the Banten area. The remaining part of UUB punishments only inflicted a deterrent effect on criminals by imposing fines in the form of specific objects or currency.

THE CONTINUITY AND CHANGE OF DIYAT AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO ISLAMIC CRIMINAL SANCTIONS IN UNDHANG-UNDHANG
In Islamic law, the penalty for paying a fine in the form of a certain object or a type of means of payment is called a diyat. The fine criminal sanction is a substitute sanction (aluqubat al-badaliyat) for hudud sanctions, which are used when there are obstacles to implementing them or reasons that make it fail to apply (saqth), but the perpetrators of the crime are still responsible for paying a fine because they do not obtain forgiveness. The value of perfect diyat (diyat kamilat) is worth the price of 100 cows, whereas the fine criminal sanction in which its value is less than that stipulation (diyat naqisat) is called arsy. The scholars (ulama) typically generalized arsy by only mentioning diyat. Whereas, they dividedarsy into two categories: (1) arsy mentioned in Shari'a (arsy miqdar), such as a fine that is equivalent to an injured limb, and (2) arsy not mentioned in Shari'a (arsy ghair miqdar), whose value is determined by the judge (arsy hukumat). 5 The types of fines (diyat and arsy) were not widely understood by historians of

Material Law in UUB
UUB material law was made up of 5 (five) legal regulations: special criminal acts, general criminal acts, customs law, slavery law, and agrarian law.

Special Criminal Acts
Special criminal acts mentioned in the UUB were actions that were disrespected by the sultan and officials because they disrupted the comfort, order, security, and honor of the sultan's government, such as fighting, hate speech, and so on. UUB frequently includes articles prohibiting fighting and other specific criminal acts. Four articles in the UUB prohibit fights that directly disturb the comfort of royal officials (UUB: 1-3).Then, in the middle of the UUB, two articles reiterate the legal threat of fighting that can disrupt the peace of the village and sub-village levels, which are referred to as "pambekel" (UUB: 20-23).In addition to fighting, the UUB also regulates the following types of actions that can be classified as disturbing public order: First, people from the ordinary community  These regulations had been in place since Sultan Haji's reign as a preventive measure to create stability, security, order, and defense of the empire. According to the UUB, if there was a war one day, the nayaga and punggawa were required to be present at the palace and beat the Gongs and Kendang as a sign of a war attack. Similarly, the nayaga, courtiers, and ministers who lived in the Tepis Wiring area were required to gather in the square. The bodyguards had to approach and accompany each of their superiors. If they did not appear immediately, they and their families were arrested on suspicion of being defectors.

General Criminal Acts
UUB distinguished between special types of criminal acts, such as actions that the sultan and nobles despised, and general criminal acts that caused massive civil disorder.
If special criminal acts were described in a series of locations that denoted elite areas, such as the paseban of the noble families, then general crimes were likely to be applied to crimes committed in public places.The potential for crime in public places was enormous, such as in the Karangantu area, which De Houtman envisioned as a port as well as Java's second largest market after Sunda Kelapa Harbor.
In order to guarantee security and order in publicareas, Sultan Haji issued a law threatening acts that were classified as general crimes, such as: (a)   In other words, parties who violated this rule were declared to have violated customs regulations, and the ships and all their contents were confiscated (UUB: 20).

Slavery Law
The practice of buying and selling slaves, as well as slavery, was legalized in the Banten area because some people needed unskilled labor. Meanwhile, labor was in short supply at the time. Slaves were not only treated as private property to serve their masters during the Banten Sultanate era but they were also traded and rented out. Reid, who visited Banten, stated that a slave's daily wage was 1,000 cash or the equivalent of 15 bushels of rice. 11 The slaves' wages or earnings did not fully belong to them, and some were handed back to their masters. According to JC. Van Leur, employers

Agrarian Law
The sultan owned all of Banten's land, as implied by the phrase "earth law" (UUB: (UUB: 38). According to UUB, the opening of new land must be at least 40 fathoms from the boundaries of open land or those that have been managed and cultivated. Every cultivator was required to construct water ditches around rice fieldsthat serve as boundary markers, as well as irrigation to drain water to neighboring fields (UUB: 38-39). UUB did not regulate the land law in detail, including land tax provisions, because the Sultanate of Banten was more oriented towards maritime affairs. Therefore, the customs law was more detailed than the land law.

UUB Criminal Sanctions and Law Enforcement
In UUB, all types of unlawful acts could be punished, referring to the general terms "kinaun" and "kapidana"; with the imposition of criminal sanctions by the "earth". For example, the application of sanctions in cases of slavery disputes was mentioned as follows: "Lan lamun nayaga utowo punggawa adol wong dalem maka katitik ing padolan maka kebedol wong iku dining hukum serta tinetepaken wong iku ing hukum dining bumi" (UUB: 4). The repeated use of "earth" in UUB was identical with the ruler's power, notably Sultan (Queen), as in the meaning "earth law" (UUB: 29). In a practical sense, the Sultan was in charge of imposing sanctions. However, the Sultan did not do everything himself, except the sanctions imposed on people who killed foreigners (UUB: 22).
In addition to this case, the imposition of punishment was carried out by sultan's officials, Fakih Najmuddin, who served as qadi (judge), or Prince Arya Dipaningrat, who had the legal authority and tax collection at the port. However, during the final period of reached an agreement. According to Talens' records, the VOC wanted to reduce Pakih Najmuddin's influence in the application of Islamic law in the Sultanate of Banten during the reign of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa. However, the Sultan rejected the suggestion, and the desire to extend the peace agreement by more than ten years was canceled. 13 The decline of Pakih Najmuddin's position was followed by forms of criminal sanctions during the reign of Sultan Haji and his successors, in which the hudud punishment was replaced by paying a fine.
In comparison to the strong influence of Islamic law in Banten in the 17th century, particularly during the reign of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa, Shrieke -quoted by Talens (1992), and Anthonie Reid (1993). According to Reid, as quoted by Talens, he stated that the Islamic law implemented by the Sultanate of Banten was based on the Shafi'i school, in which his influence could be seen in the hudud punishments which were so strict and rigid such as in the implementation of the law of cutting off hands (de verminkingenamputatie van ledematen). During the reign of Sultan Haji, many hudud punishments were replaced by fines.
Even though the hudud punishment was still in effect, it was still confidential because in the Banten Law, it was stated that "the hudud case must be handed over to the Queen". This information was confirmed by a report by a British trader named Edmund Scott, who stated:'I will tell you the laws of our country, which is this: if one kills a slave, he must pay 20 riyals; if a freeman, 50 riyals; if a gentleman, 100 riyals. 14 If the hudud punishment was replaced by a fine, the authority of Pakih Najmuddin would be replaced by a Prince of the same level as Prince Arya Dipaningrat to enforce the law. More specifically, in the writer's opinion, this authority was in the power of Prince Arya Dipaningratas the recipient of the sultan's mandate, who had the authority to enforce regulations in the port area because these types of crimes were common in the Karangantu 13 Leur. 14 Johan Talens, "Een Feodale Samenleving in Kolonial Yaarwater. Staatsvorming, Koloniale Expansie En Economische Onderontwikkeling in Banten, West-Java (1600-1750)," Bijdragen En Mededelingen Betreffende de Geschiedenis Der Nederlanden 4 (1999). area, whereas special crimes had been determined to occur in paseban or special areas inhabited by nobles and the upper classes. As a result, the punishment of paying a fine, which was enforced during the reign of Sultan Haji and his successors, became the sultan's revenue, in addition to taxes collected by Prince Arya Dipaningrat, who also served as Syahbandar.
The details of the forms of criminal sanctions -from the most severe to the mildestthat were explained in the UUB from the time of Sultan Haji to the time of Sultan Abul Mahasin Muhammad Zainul Abidin were as follows: First, the punishment for cutting off a hand was applied to the thief of goods worth one ryal of the property of a new person who arrived or had just arrived at the port (UUB: 22). Conversely, there was no explanation in the UUB as written in Talens' report on the hand-cutting sanction for the drug addict that had been implemented during the reign of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa. The exception was that the drug addict's witness testimony could not be accepted under the law as written (UUB: 34-35).
Second, fines included cash payments and coral reef collection. In UUB, the type of currency used to pay fines was riyal and picis (which was calculated in a bunch worth Keti).
Banten's currency consisted of several types of riyal, including the Bantenese Riyal currency, which was made of copper, the Dutch Riyal currency, which was made of silver, and the Spanish Riyal currency, also known as the Spanish dollar. 15 The penalty for paying a fine in Ryal currency in the UUB was set specifically for foreigners or people not belonging to Surosowan groups. The currency used was Bantenese Riyal, which was a round coin with round holes, 1.90-2.40 cm in diameter, 0.05-0.16 cm thick, 0.60-1.20 cm hole diameter, and made of tin.
As for unlawful acts that were subject to the obligation to pay fines in ryal currency were; (a) if foreigners fight in the Surosowan square and the Karangantu port area by using weapons, they are fined paying 2000 riyals (UUB. 12); (b) if during the fight they do not use their weapons, they are fined 1000 riyals (UUB. 11); (c) If a person kills another person without reason or for reasons such as killing his wife because she has committed adultery with another man, he will be fined 200 riyals .The proposition of the penalty for killing is actually less than the amount of the penalty for paying a fine because of a fight; (d) If a (slave) woman beats a man who does not want to retaliate, she is fined 20 riyals (UUB: 10); (e) If a (slave) woman swears at a man who does not want to retaliate, she is fined 10 riyals (UUB: 9); (f) If a foreigner (slave owner) allows a (slave) fight in public, he is fined 30 riyals (UUB: 12). Fighting at Pakih Najmuddin's Paseban was initially fined 2 million Picis, but this was reduced to 1 million picis and 3 keti (UUB: 23). b) If two or more people fight at the prince's worksite, they must pay a fine of 1 Million picis and 3 keti (UUB: 1); This provision was also changed that the prince's paseban referred to UUB was a place belonging to Prince Datuwangsa, Prince Perbangsa, Prince Wirasuta, Prince Wirasmara, Prince Jayaningrat, Prince Adiwangsa, and Prince Sutakusuma, so that if they fight in this area, theyare fined 1 million picis and 5 keti.  The Sultan purposefully decided to pay fines in the form of coral reefs so that they could be used to develop the city of Surosowan. According to Hariyanti, the results of coral observations and analysis at the Old Banten site show that coral can be used for a variety of purposes, such as building wall beams, foundations, pillar support bases, building decorative panels, pillar support panels, building decoration panels, bullets, gravestones, and plaster. The  The sultan and nobles would confiscate or expropriate ownership rights over slaves who had escaped from their masters if their masters were unable to redeem them as long as the slave's master was not a member of the nobility or a group of ordinary people (UUB: 2).

Diyat as a Qisas and Hudud Substitute in UUB
Diyat is a property that must be paid for committing a crime against another person. This analysis was strengthened by historical and archeological data compiled by Hasan Muarif Ambari. According to him, the city of Banten was still growing in 1659-1715; canals had been added, one of the oldest of which served as a foreigner's settlement (new town), and in the east was a bustling market; the fort surroundings were perfected; although it was not presented in Valentijin's maps, the Dutch had built strong fortifications in the north corner facing the sea; the fort was built by the request of the Governors-general of VOC at that time, Cornelis Speelman, which was named Spellwijk Fort. The road and canal system was expanded between 1725 and 1759 by digging ditches around the Surosowan Palace and building the Dutch fortifications. The canal that ran beneath the chain bridge has been straightened eastward to the south of the Karangantu market. Heydt's map depicted the process of moving and changing the city plan, including architectural elements, canals, streets, and city walls. 28 Surosowan's development in the 17th century required increased efforts, both financially and in terms of labor capital. Therefore, the sultan's initiatives to replace qisas and hudud punishments with fines in the form of money, and coral reefs, as well as forced labor, were made up based on fiqh and siyasa syari'yah.
The other side of the sultan's initiative in diyat law was the determination of the type of currency used to pay fines. The UUB that was imposed during the Sultan Haji era required foreign residents to pay fines in riyals currency. While the natives pay fines in picis currency, even thoughpicis coins have a lower value than other coins. As an illustration, to determine the price of a slave per day to be hired, one must deposit 1,000 picis (1 peku) to his master, along with a meal worth 200 picis.The Chinese in Banten used to buy 8 sacks of pepper from the mountains for 1 keti and sold it for 4 keti in the Karangantu market. The value of the picis currency, which was originally used by Chinese traders throughout the region, began to fall as a result of the presence of several currencies on the free market, particularly the riyal currency and the Spanish dollar. 29