This study aims to analyze the regulations and procedures governing polygamy in Indonesia and Malaysia and to evaluate their effectiveness in providing legal protection for women and children. The study employs a normative legal methodology, incorporating legislative, comparative, and conceptual approaches. Data consisting of legislation, court decisions, and legal literature were analyzed qualitatively using Lawrence M. Friedman’s theory of legal systems—which encompasses legal substance, structure, and culture—as well as the theory of maqāṣid al-sharīa to assess protections for life, lineage, and property. The results of the study indicate that both countries share similarities in the basic regulations, restrictions, licensing procedures, and practices regarding polygamy, but differ in their legal protection mechanisms. Malaysia imposes sanctions for violations of polygamy laws, requires verification of the husband’s financial capacity, and provides a mechanism for legalizing unregistered polygamy to ensure that the rights of wives and children remain protected. In contrast, unregistered polygamy in Indonesia faces difficulties in obtaining legal recognition because it depends on the fulfillment of formal requirements; consequently, protection for women and children remains suboptimal and does not fully reflect the principles of maqāṣid al-sharīa. This study contributes to the integration of the substantive, structural, and cultural dimensions of law as the basis for reforming polygamy regulations in a way that is more focused on protecting the rights of women and children.
This article analyzes the compatibility of legislative practices during the lame-duck session with legal policy and siyāsa dustūriyya by examining Law No. 3 of 2024, the Second Amendment to Law No. 6 of 2014 concerning Villages. This study is a normative legal research employing a statutory, conceptual, and comparative approach. Legal materials were analyzed through legal interpretation and prescriptive analysis to assess constitutional legitimacy and the principles of Islamic constitutional law governing the exercise of legislative authority during a political transition. The results of the study indicate that although the House of Representatives retains the constitutional authority to enact laws until the end of its term, the enactment of strategic laws following the emergence of a new electoral mandate has undermined democratic legitimacy. From the perspective of constitutional politics, this practice is not entirely consistent with the principles of maṣlaḥah, al-'adl, amānah, and shūrā. Therefore, Indonesia’s legal policy needs to limit the DPR’s legislative authority during a lame-duck session about strategic laws, while still allowing for the enactment of laws that are urgent, administrative, or intended to prevent a legal vacuum. This finding contributes to the development of the concept of transitional legislative restrictions within Indonesia’s constitutional system.
This study analyzes the paradox between the use of religious symbolism in local election campaigns in Indonesia in 2024 and the corruption committed by several Muslim local leaders after their election. The study employs a qualitative design that combines a normative-juridical approach with comparative socio-political analysis through case studies of five regional heads in East Kolaka, Ponorogo, Central Lampung, Bekasi, and Riau who were arrested by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in 2025. Normative data were obtained from the literature on siyāsa sharʿiyya, anti-corruption laws and regulations, and official KPK documents. In contrast, empirical data were analyzed using Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of symbolic capital and Max Weber’s theory of charismatic authority. The results indicate that religious symbolism plays an effective role in building electoral legitimacy but does not translate into ethical commitment in governance. Religious identity functions more as political capital than as a foundation for public integrity. These findings suggest that the combination of the instrumentalization of religious symbols and high electoral costs creates incentives for post-election rent-seeking. In practical terms, this study recommends strengthening political integrity through electoral financing reform, ethical oversight of public officials, and the development of leadership indicators that emphasize integrity alongside religious symbolism.
This research aims to describe the forms of conflict and negotiation that can arise between Islamic religious law and customary law in the practice of dowry (mahr) provision within Muslim Papuan marriages, to achieve a balanced coexistence. The primary focus of this study is to examine the forms of conflict and the conflict negotiation mechanisms that can be applied within the tradition of marriage dowry practices. This research employs a qualitative approach with a case study design focusing on Muslim communities of the Marind tribe in Merauke and the Dani tribe in Wamena, Papua, Indonesia. Data were collected through in-depth interviews, direct observation, and systematic documentation. After the research data were fully collected, they were processed and analysed using a descriptive contextual approach. The findings reveal that customary law is prioritised over religious law in determining marriage traditions. The continued existence and application of customary law have implications for tensions and conflicts with Islamic law. Therefore, marriage traditions, particularly the practice of dowry provision among Papuan Muslims, need to be reconstructed through negotiation in order to reconcile religious and customary law so that both may remain harmonious and coexist. Through restorative and normative–theological approaches, this study proposes a new model of negotiation that enables the continued practice of dowry provision based on customary rules without violating Islamic legal principles.
This article aims to conduct a comparative analysis of contract cancellation theories in the Jordanian and French legal systems, focusing on contracts involving the illegal transfer of another party's property. This study examines the fundamental differences between the concepts of absolute and relative nullity in French law and the Jordanian legal approach rooted in Islamic jurisprudence, particularly through the concepts of “suspension” and “non-binding contracts.” The method used is normative legal research with a philosophical-comparative approach. The analysis was conducted on the main provisions of Jordanian legislation and legislative and judicial practices in France, accompanied by a doctrinal study of the theories of cancellation and protection of third-party rights in both legal systems. The findings of the study show that French law makes a clear distinction between absolute and relative nullity, while Jordanian law rejects the concept of relative nullity and replaces it with a suspension mechanism. The theory of suspension, inspired by Islamic law, is considered more flexible and equitable, especially in protecting the property rights of third parties, including vulnerable persons, and more adaptive to the complexity of modern transactions. The practical contribution of this research is a recommendation for legislative reform in Jordan to expand the subjects entitled to cancel suspended contracts, as well as an encouragement for civil law systems to consider adopting the theory of suspension as an alternative to relative nullity. The integration of this concept is believed to increase legal certainty and the protection of individual rights in complex contract disputes.
