Islamic Equity Crowdfunding (IEC) has emerged as an alternative financing mechanism for small and medium enterprises and an investment channel consistent with Islamic principles. In Indonesia, POJK No. 17 of 2025 regulates IEC, guided by DSN-MUI Fatwa No. 140/DSN-MUI/VIII/2021. Using digital platforms as IEC intermediaries creates interconnected investor-protection challenges, including information asymmetry, limited post-investment monitoring, challenges in continuing Sharia oversight, and emerging digital risks. This study examines how regulatory and governance mechanisms address these challenges and reconceptualizes investor protection within Islamic economic law. Using a qualitative socio-legal approach, the study analyzes regulatory and Sharia documents alongside semi-structured interviews with investors, platform operators, regulators, and Sharia supervisory stakeholders. The study analyzes findings through Asymmetric Information Theory and Responsive Law Theory. It interprets them through maqāṣid al-sharīʿah, particularly ḥifẓ al-māl, al-ʿadl, al-maṣlaḥah, and rafʿ al-ḍarar. The findings reveal a gap between formal compliance and substantive investor protection, particularly in ongoing verification, post-investment monitoring, risk disclosure, continuing Sharia supervision, and responses to emerging digital risks. The study develops an Integrated Digital Sharia Investor Protection Framework comprising regulatory oversight, platform accountability, investor risk transparency, continuous Sharia supervision, and digital monitoring.
Islamic financial institutions (IFIs) face growing demands to disclose environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance. Yet a normative gap persists between Sharia governance, which largely prioritises contract-level compliance, and global sustainability reporting standards, which do not explicitly incorporate Islamic legal norms. This article examines how maqāṣid al-sharīʿah can provide a normative and legal foundation for integrating ESG reporting into Islamic accounting and Sharia governance. Using normative legal research and a conceptual approach, it analyses classical and contemporary maqāṣid scholarship, Islamic accounting literature, and relevant standards issued by AAOIFI, the IFSB, and international sustainability standard-setters. The analysis identifies three interrelated foundations for integration. First, ESG objectives can be interpreted through the preservation of life, intellect, lineage, wealth, and religion, supported by the principles of maṣlaḥah, ʿadl, amānah, and khilāfah. Second, Islamic accounting principles of accountability, transparency, justice, and social responsibility provide an operational basis for translating these objectives into disclosure practices. Third, meaningful integration requires Sharia governance to extend beyond formal contractual compliance towards accountability for institutions' social and environmental responsibilities. Building on these findings, the article proposes a Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah-Based ESG Reporting Framework that connects Islamic normative commitments with global sustainability reporting requirements. Its contribution lies in positioning ESG disclosure as an integral dimension of Sharia accountability, with implications for regulatory policy, Sharia Supervisory Board oversight, and IFIs' reporting practices.
The transformation of Islamic family law in the contemporary era demands a repositioning of maqāṣid al-nikāḥ to be more responsive to the protection of gender rights. Indonesia and Iran represent two different models of legal codification in translating the principle of substantive justice into marriage regulations. This study aims to dissect the dynamics of gender rights protection regarding polygamy, divorce, custody, and inheritance in Indonesia and Iran through the lens of Jasser Auda’s System Theory. This study is a qualitative research with a comparative-juridical approach. The analysis is conducted by comparing the normative texts of the Indonesian Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI) and the Iranian Civil Code (Qānūn-e Madanī), as well as functional data on their implementation in the courts. The results of the study indicate that Indonesia applies the “Judicial Formalism” model that prioritizes state intervention as a guarantor of women’s rights. In contrast, Iran applies the “Contractual Protection” model that relies on private autonomy in the marriage contract (‘aqd-nāmeh). Indonesia is more progressive in the flexibility of custody and joint property rights, while Iran is very strong in financial security through the mahrieh mechanism. This study concludes that the repositioning of maqāṣid al-nikāḥ from biological preservation to the protection of human dignity (karāmah al-insāniyyah) is highly dependent on the legal system’s openness to sociological realities and universal human rights standards.
Al-Fākihānī, a 14th-century Mālikī scholar from Alexandria, holds a significant place in the history of Islamic jurisprudence for his work, Riyāḍ al-Afhām fī Sharḥ ʿUmdat al-Aḥkām. This work not only represents a commentary on legal hadiths but also showcases the architecture of Mālikī legal reasoning, which interconnects textual authority, the theory of uṣūl al-fiqh, and the formation of applied jurisprudential norms. Diverging from previous studies that tend to position al-Fākihānī merely as a hadith commentator or a passive transmitter of school doctrine, this study offers a distinct perspective by reading him as an epistemic actor who reconstructs the relationship between legal theory and jurisprudential practice through mechanisms of intra-school ijtihād, tarjīḥ, internal critique and the principle of murāʿāt al-khilāf. Utilizing a qualitative library-based method and a textual-legal analytical approach toward Riyāḍ al-Afhām and Mālikī jurisprudential literature, this study finds that al-Fākihānī does not merely reproduce school authority. Instead, he actively selects, tests, and validates legal opinions by combining textual evidence, rational argumentation, and an awareness of the plurality of legal opinions. The primary merit of this research lies in its ability to demonstrate that murāʿāt al-khilāf, which is frequently positioned as a secondary principle, functions precisely as a crucial methodological instrument in maintaining the flexibility, coherence and adaptive capacity of Mālikī law. These findings offer a conceptual contribution to global Islamic legal studies by challenging the assumption that classical jurisprudence is static and imitative; conversely, the Mālikī tradition demonstrates internal mechanisms for critique, negotiation and legal renewal. Consequently, this study shapes the development of contemporary discourses on the codification of Islamic law, school pluralism, and the reconstruction of Islamic legal epistemology rooted in the classical tradition, which remain relevant to the problems of modern legal normativity.
This study examines the reconstruction of Islamic legal reasoning toward halal regulation in a secular Muslim-minority state, analyzing Australia's regulatory framework (the Export Control Act 2020, Australian Standard AS 4696:2023) alongside fatwas and institutional guidelines issued by SICHMA, ICCV, ANIC, and AFIC between 2013 and 2024, through a doctrinal-analytical approach. Analysis of these regulatory documents and fatwas shows that the Islamic legal bodies examined have consistently responded to secular regulatory pressure reactively, without developing a coherent maqāṣid al-sharī’ah-based framework of reasoning, as evidenced by ANIC and AFIC's divergent positions on controlled atmospheric stunning in 2023. This pattern produces three institutional consequences, identifiable from the same data: communal confusion in the face of inconsistent certification, fragmentation of religious identity, and the erosion of the legitimacy of Islamic legal authority. Building on this analysis, the study proposes the Contextual Halal Legal Navigation Model (CHLNM), a maqāṣid al-sharī’ah-grounded framework integrating textual foundation, contextual awareness, maqāṣid orientation, and educational internalization, as a legal-theoretical contribution that repositions Islamic law not as a mechanism of administrative compliance but as an adaptive process of ethical formation responsive to secular regulatory contexts.
