<![CDATA[The growing volume of sharia business transactions in Indonesia has increased the need for effective dispute resolution. However, the National Sharia Arbitration Board (BASYARNAS) faces challenges in ensuring substantive sharia compliance and enforcing arbitral awards through the Religious Courts. This study evaluates BASYARNAS’s effectiveness, identifies legal and institutional barriers to award enforcement, and proposes solutions to strengthen legal certainty. It employs normative legal research with a socio-legal approach. Data were collected through legal document analysis, examination of exequatur determinations and arbitration annulment rulings, and consultative discussions with arbitrators, judges, and legal practitioners. Data analysis followed the interactive model of Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña, supported by legal effectiveness theory and sharia compliance principles. The findings indicate that BASYARNAS performs effectively at the formal dispute-resolution stage due to its speed, confidentiality, procedural flexibility, and arbitrator expertise. However, substantive effectiveness remains limited when arbitral reasoning does not fully incorporate DSN-MUI Fatwas. Enforcement is further hindered by the absence of independent enforcement powers, normative conflicts between arbitration and judicial power regulations, bureaucratic delays in exequatur proceedings, and limited technical competence among court bailiffs in contemporary sharia financial transactions. This study contributes an integrated framework for reconstructing the legal and institutional mechanisms governing sharia arbitral award enforcement through regulatory harmonization, an E-Exequatur system integrated with E-Court, anti-suit injunction clauses, and specialized competency certification for court bailiffs]]>
