<![CDATA[Background: The enactment of Law No. 1 of 2023 (New Criminal Code) represents a pivotal moment in decolonizing Dutch colonial criminal law in Indonesia. Yet, this reform raises fundamental philosophical questions regarding the boundaries of state penal authority. This dilemma reflects a broader transnational paradigm shift across Muslim-majority nations facing the challenge of reconciling penal restraint, constitutional democracy, and Islamic legal philosophy. The criminalization of ideology, public order, religion, and morality heightens concerns over overcriminalization. This reveals a deeper tension between positive law, constitutional rights, international human rights treaties (ICCPR and UDHR), and the Islamic principle of legality (tasyrī’ī). Purpose: This study evaluates the legal legitimacy of the New Criminal Code’s controversial provisions through contemporary maqāṣid al-sharī’ah, demonstrates the organic harmonization between Pancasila and Islamic law, and formulates a normative model for state penal boundaries. Methods: Utilizing normative legal research, this study integrates statutory, conceptual, comparative, and maqāṣid approaches. Primary legal materials, Constitutional Court rulings, and maqāṣid literature were analyzed qualitatively, complemented by purposive expert interviews (Prof. Moh. Mahfud MD and Prof. Topo Santoso) serving as communis opinio doctorum (tertiary sources). Data were evaluated through content analysis, normative interpretation, and legal reasoning. Results: Findings show that while controversial provisions pursue legitimate state aims, several clauses compromise legal certainty and sanction proportionality. The analysis unveils a tension between maṣlaḥah ʿammah and maṣlaḥah fardiyyah in public order clauses, establishes operational judicial parameters to distinguish criticism (ḥifẓ al-ʿaql) from insult (ḥifẓ al-karāmah), and highlights an epistemological shift in ḥifẓ al-ʿirḍ from classical punitive enforcement toward contemporary privacy and personal autonomy protection. Implication: This research provides legislative guidelines, offers an urgent analytical framework for the Constitutional Court during judicial review, and prevents penal state overreach. Transnationally, it serves as a theoretical contribution to criminal law reform in Muslim-majority jurisdictions Originality: This study establishes the Contemporary Maqāṣid-Based Penal Legitimacy Framework (CMPF) as its core intellectual brand, comprising five principles: justice, necessity (ultimum remedium), proportionality, public welfare (maṣlaḥah), and human dignity. Unlike prior studies, it conceptualizes maqāṣid as a limiting theory on state power organically harmonized with Pancasila and global human rights standards]]>
