<![CDATA[This study aims to compare halal certification governance in Indonesia and Malaysia as a manifestation of state obligations under international human rights law and to examine how the fulfillment of these obligations shapes different models of regulatory limitations imposed on business actors. This study employs doctrinal legal research using statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. The theory of responsive regulation is applied to analyze how the state influences business compliance through a combination of coercive and persuasive regulatory strategies. Building on this framework, the study develops the concept of regulatory limitations to examine the extent and manner through which state intervention regulates business actors within halal certification systems. The findings reveal that both Indonesia and Malaysia fulfill their obligations to protect Muslim consumers’ rights; however, they adopt different approaches in defining state responsibilities and designing regulatory limitations. Indonesia demonstrates a relatively limited implementation of state obligations through a legal-formal regulatory limitation model. This model prioritizes the mandatory nature of halal certification while providing flexibility in certification procedures and relatively adaptive post-certification supervision. Conversely, Malaysia reflects a due diligence approach in fulfilling human rights obligations and adopts an institutional governance model of regulatory limitations. This approach emphasizes voluntary participation in halal certification while maintaining stringent certification procedures and comprehensive post-certification monitoring mechanisms. The comparative analysis indicates that both governance models possess distinct strengths and limitations. Indonesia provides stronger legal certainty through mandatory certification, yet faces challenges in supervision effectiveness and institutional capacity. Malaysia demonstrates stronger governance mechanisms and regulatory oversight but relies more heavily on institutional credibility and voluntary compliance. Therefore, this study proposes a proportional and responsive halal governance model that combines mandatory consumer protection standards with adaptive regulatory mechanisms. Such a model seeks to strengthen halal assurance systems through strict yet proportionate certification requirements, effective inspection procedures, and continuous post-certification monitoring. ]]>
