The high-profile divorce proceedings between socialite Tasya Farasya and Ahmad Assegaf have taken an unexpected turn. Just as the South Jakarta Religious Court’s ruling, issued on November 12, was poised to become legally binding, Ahmad Assegaf filed an appeal, prolonging the legal separation process. This development has surprised many, especially Tasya’s legal team, who initially believed the matter was settled.
The initial verdict from the South Jakarta Religious Court was expected to achieve permanent legal force, or ‘inkrah’, shortly after its November 12 announcement. However, Ahmad’s decision to launch an appeal just a day before the ruling was to become final has effectively put the brakes on its implementation. “Just yesterday, we received an update from the Religious Court; I got a notification that the defendant [Ahmad] has filed an appeal,” stated Sangun Ragahdo, Tasya Farasya’s legal counsel, speaking in SCBD, South Jakarta, on Wednesday, November 26. He added, “It was supposed to be final today, but because of the appeal yesterday, the process is still ongoing.”
Ragahdo further explained that Tasya’s legal team had initially presumed that both parties had accepted the court’s decision rendered on November 12. Tasya Farasya, he confirmed, was mentally prepared to embrace a new chapter in her life, fully accepting her altered status should her divorce from Ahmad Assegaf be officially finalized. “From the beginning, Ms. Tasya herself wanted to focus on her career, her life, and raising her children,” Ragahdo revealed. He continued, “So, perhaps for this case, which was decided yesterday, if accepted and made final, it could open a new page.”
Adding to the unfolding drama, Mohammad Fattah Riphat, another of Tasya’s legal representatives, expressed profound bewilderment regarding Ahmad’s decision to appeal. Riphat highlighted the unique circumstances of Tasya’s petition: she had not sought alimony, made no claims for marital assets, and the arrangement for child custody had already been mutually agreed upon. These factors collectively make the appeal seem unusual, as typical grounds for appeal often revolve around dissatisfaction with such financial or custodial rulings.
Riphat elaborated on his confusion, stating, “Essentially, an appeal is typically lodged by someone who disagrees with the verdict.” He then posed pertinent questions about the true motive behind Ahmad’s action: “Whereas the verdict, if you look at it, Tasya didn’t ask for anything. She didn’t ask for alimony, didn’t ask for anything. Child custody was also agreed upon. So, what exactly is being appealed? What is the issue here? Does he not want a divorce? Does he want reconciliation? Or what?” His remarks underscore the mystery surrounding Ahmad Assegaf’s decision to challenge a ruling that, from Tasya’s perspective, made no contentious demands.
Despite the surprise and lingering questions, Tasya’s legal team maintains a position of respect for Ahmad Assegaf’s right to pursue an appeal. They are now patiently awaiting the official submission of the appeal brief, which will undoubtedly shed light on the specific points Ahmad wishes to challenge in the ongoing divorce proceedings. The case thus remains unresolved, with all eyes on the next legal developments.
Summary
Tasya Farasya’s divorce proceedings with Ahmad Assegaf have been extended due to an appeal filed by Ahmad. This appeal came as a surprise, as Tasya’s legal team believed the South Jakarta Religious Court’s ruling on November 12 would become legally binding. The appeal has delayed the finalization of the divorce.
Tasya’s legal team is puzzled by the appeal, as she did not seek alimony or marital assets, and child custody was already agreed upon. They are awaiting the appeal brief to understand Ahmad’s reasons for challenging the ruling. Tasya Farasya, meanwhile, was reportedly ready to move on and focus on her career and children.