Search

Background: Increasing transnational mobility has accelerated cross-border marriages among Muslim communities, particularly between Indonesia and Malaysia. Although both countries share common foundations in Islamic family law, differences in marriage registration systems continue to generate legal uncertainty regarding marital recognition, inheritance, child legitimacy, and judicial protection.

Methods: This study employs a qualitative doctrinal and comparative legal approach by examining statutory regulations, institutional arrangements, and scholarly literature on cross-border marriage registration in Indonesia and Malaysia. The analysis is interpreted through the maqāṣid al-sharīʿah framework to assess legal governance and family protection.

Results: The findings indicate that both jurisdictions pursue the same objectives of legal certainty and family protection but adopt different administrative and institutional mechanisms. Indonesia emphasizes centralized registration and judicial validation, whereas Malaysia relies on state Islamic religious authorities and Syariah Courts, resulting in different procedures for recognizing cross-border marriages.

Discussion: Based on these findings, this study develops the Integrated Maqāṣid-Based Cross-Border Marriage Governance (IMCG) Model, comprising regulatory compatibility, institutional coordination, digital administrative interoperability, judicial cooperation, and maqāṣid-oriented family protection. The model promotes legal interoperability while respecting national legal sovereignty.

Conclusion: Cross-border marriage registration should be understood as an integrated governance mechanism that strengthens legal certainty, family rights, and sustainable protection for transnational Muslim families through enhanced bilateral cooperation.

Novelty: This study introduces the IMCG Model, integrating comparative Islamic family law, administrative governance, and maqāṣid al-sharīʿah into a unified framework for strengthening cross-border marriage governance among Muslim-majority jurisdictions.

Background: The legal validity of anti-polygamy clauses in Islamic marriage contracts remains contested between classical Islamic jurisprudence and contemporary statutory reforms. Although previous studies discuss polygamy from doctrinal, sociological, and judicial perspectives, limited research comparatively examines the legal enforceability of such clauses under classical Shāfi'ī jurisprudence and Indonesia's Kompilasi Hukum Islam (KHI).

Objective: This study analyzes the legal validity of anti-polygamy clauses under classical Shāfi'ī jurisprudence and the KHI, compares their underlying legal reasoning through maqāṣid al-sharī'ah, and evaluates their implications for Islamic family law reform in Indonesia.

Methods: This qualitative doctrinal legal research applies a comparative approach using classical Shāfi'ī legal texts, the Qur'an, relevant ḥadīth, the KHI, and contemporary Islamic family law literature. Data were analyzed through doctrinal interpretation, comparative legal analysis, and the maqāṣid al-sharī'ah framework.

Findings: Classical Shāfi'ī jurisprudence considers anti-polygamy clauses legally non-binding while maintaining the validity of marriage. In contrast, the KHI recognizes their enforceability to promote justice, family welfare, and legal certainty. Comparative analysis demonstrates that maqāṣid al-sharī'ah provides a normative framework for reconciling classical jurisprudence with contemporary statutory reforms.

Conclusion: A maqāṣid-based approach enables Islamic family law to preserve doctrinal authenticity while strengthening contractual autonomy and protecting family welfare.

Novelty: This study proposes an integrated maqāṣid-based comparative framework that bridges classical Shāfi'ī jurisprudence and Indonesia's statutory Islamic family law in assessing the legitimacy and enforceability of anti-polygamy clauses.

Background: The rapid growth of digital technology has transformed Islamic legal services and religious authority, raising important questions about the implementation of religious moderation in Islamic family law and siyāsah fiqh. However, empirical studies on how these changes are locally practiced in Indonesian municipal contexts, especially in Banjar City, are still limited.

Methods: This study uses a qualitative case study approach. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with Islamic scholars, government officials, and community actors, as well as document analysis of digital legal platforms such as online marriage registration systems and e-governance services. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results: Digitalization has improved administrative efficiency and access to Islamic family law services, especially in marriage and divorce registration. However, limited standardization, weak regulatory oversight, and differences in legal interpretation have created legal uncertainty and reduced public trust. Digital spaces also both support and challenge moderate religious discourse.

Discussion: These findings show that digital transformation affects not only administrative systems but also religious authority and legal interpretation. This situation highlights the need to balance technological development with Islamic ethical principles based on maqāṣid al-sharīʿah and religious moderation.

Conclusion: Religious moderation plays an important role in managing the relationship between digital technology and Islamic legal governance in Banjar City. Stronger institutional coordination and clear regulations are needed to ensure legal certainty, accountability, and public trust.

Novelty: This study provides empirical insights into how digital governance interacts with Islamic legal moderation at the local level, contributing to socio-legal studies of digital Islam in urban Indonesia.

Background: Climate mobility increasingly affects Muslim families by disrupting marriage stability, child protection, inheritance, maintenance obligations, and access to justice. Existing studies primarily address climate mobility from environmental or human rights perspectives, while a comprehensive Islamic family law framework grounded in maqāṣid al-sharīʿah remains underdeveloped. This study proposes a Maqāṣid-Based Climate Family Resilience (MCFR) Model through comparative analysis of Egypt, Indonesia, and Spain.

Methods: This study employs a qualitative comparative socio-legal approach integrating doctrinal legal analysis, comparative Islamic family law, policy analysis, and documentary research. The analytical framework combines maqāṣid al-sharīʿah, Climate Justice Theory, Family Resilience Theory, and Legal Pluralism Theory.

Results: The findings indicate that climate mobility generates similar legal and social challenges across the three jurisdictions despite differing legal traditions. The MCFR Model integrates the five objectives of maqāṣid al-sharīʿah with climate justice, adaptive family governance, legal pluralism, and institutional collaboration to strengthen Muslim family resilience.

Discussion: The proposed model extends Islamic family law scholarship by providing a normative and adaptive framework that harmonizes religious principles with climate-responsive legal governance while promoting legal certainty, family welfare, and social justice.

Conclusion: Strengthening Muslim family resilience requires an integrated Islamic legal framework capable of addressing climate-induced family vulnerabilities. The MCFR Model offers a practical and theoretically grounded approach for climate-responsive family law reform in diverse legal systems.

Novelty: This study introduces the MCFR Model as an original comparative socio-legal framework linking maqāṣid al-sharīʿah, climate mobility, family resilience, and legal pluralism within contemporary Islamic family law.

Background: The determination of Islamic lunar months through rukyatul hilal constitutes a critical intersection between Islamic jurisprudence and astronomy because it establishes the legal timing of marriage, divorce, iddah, inheritance, and other matters of Islamic family law. Despite extensive studies on rukyat and hisab, limited empirical socio-legal research has examined their implications for legal certainty at the local level.

Methods: This study employed a qualitative socio-legal case study integrating normative analysis of Islamic legal sources with empirical data collected through semi-structured interviews involving Religious Court judges, Ministry of Religious Affairs officials, religious leaders, and community representatives in Banjar City, West Java, Indonesia. Documentary analysis, triangulation, and thematic analysis were applied within the framework of maqāṣid al-sharī‘ah.

Results: The findings reveal that legal certainty is strengthened through the integration of rukyat, hisab, MABIMS Neo-Visibility criteria, and the national Sidang Isbat. Although Religious Courts consistently implement the official Hijri calendar, some communities continue following organizational determinations, creating limited differences in the timing of family law practices without substantially disrupting legal administration.

Discussion: The implementation of Islamic family law depends on institutional coordination among religious authorities, state institutions, astronomers, and local communities rather than on a single method of lunar month determination.

Conclusion: Integrating religious, scientific, and institutional approaches enhances legal certainty while accommodating legitimate jurisprudential diversity in implementing Islamic family law.

Novelty: This study proposes the Integrated Rukyatul Hilal Governance Framework (IRHGF), an empirical socio-legal model explaining how astronomical observation, religious authority, institutional coordination, and public administration collectively strengthen legal certainty in Islamic family law.