<![CDATA[Existing scholarship on the Indonesian Ulema Council's (MUI) vasectomy fatwas has traced the macro-trajectory of legal change across the three temporal nodes of 1979, 2009, and 2012, interpreting the shift from absolute prohibition to conditional permissibility through the lenses of sociology of knowledge, maslahah mursalah, and maq??id al-shar??ah. The central puzzle of the transformation has remained unaddressed: between the Third National Ijtima' in Padang Panjang (January 2009) and the Fourth National Ijtima' in Cipasung (July 2012), the same medical phenomenon, the recanalisation of the vas deferens, produced two opposite legal verdicts. This article reconstructs the three-year micro-history through which a scientific controversy reached institutional closure within an Islamic legal forum. Bringing u??l al-fiqh into dialogue with Science and Technology Studies (STS), the analysis draws on both Ijtima' decision documents, the 2009 Halqah expert testimonies, Ministry of Health Letter No. TU.05.02/V/1016/2012, and the position statement of the Indonesian Association of Urological Surgeons (IAUI). The findings show that the reversal was driven not by jurisprudential reformulation but by evidentiary reconfiguration: the same evidence considered non-mu?aqqaqah in 2009 was reframed as mu?aqqaqah in 2012 once endorsed by state regulatory science and professional medical authority. The article contributes a methodological case for integrating STS frameworks into the study of contemporary Islamic jurisprudence, and shows that the persistent Indonesian controversy over vasectomy, most recently the 2025 policy debate over conditioning social assistance on the procedure, cannot be understood without grasping how its evidentiary closure was institutionally manufactured.]]>
