Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Hukum Legalita Moderation: Journal of Islamic Studies Review
Habim, Nurdin
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Social Sciences Other

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Asas Keseimbangan dan Asas Kebebasan Berkontrak Pada Perjanjian Baku Yang Menganut Konsep Take It or Leave It Mubarak, Muhammad Rafi; Habim, Nurdin; Edrisy, Ibrahim Fikma
Legalita Vol 5 No 2 (2023): Jurnal Hukum Legalita
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Kotabumi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47637/legalita.v5i2.1089

Abstract

Abstak: Perjanjian baku merupakan salah satu bagian khusus dari sebuah perjanjian yang substansinya telah ditentukan sejak awal. Pada perjanjian ini salah satu pihak hanya memiliki pilihan take it, or leave it yang bermakna jika seseorang setuju tehadap perjanjian tersebut tanda tangan dan jika tidak setuju maka boleh untuk ditingggalkan. Hasil penelitian pada tulisan ini ialah asas kebebasan berkontrak tidak sepenuhnya terealisasi atau terlaksana pada perjanjian baku dengan konsep take it, or leave it, karena dalam perjanjian yang menganut knosep tersebut tidak memberikan ruang kebebasan oleh pihak yang lemah untuk melakukan negosiasi pada tahap pra kontraktual terkait isi dan klasul-klausul pada perjanjian baku tersebut. Kemudian konsep take it, or leave it pada perjanjian baku berpeluang besar terjadinya pelanggaran terhadap asas keseimbangan, sebab pihak yang kuat atau dominan dikhawatirkan akan menggunakan kesempatan tersebut untuk mengeksploitasi, merampas hak-hak yang dimiliki pihak yang lemah, mengindimidasi serta mengalihkan tanggung jawab yang tentunya akan menimbulkan kerugian.
OTORITAS TUHAN DI TANGAN BIROKRASI: Menimbang Batas Intervensi Negara terhadap Syariah Menurut Yudian Wahyudi dan Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im David, Mohammad; Habim, Nurdin; Sadari, Sadari
Moderation | Journal of Islamic Studies Review Vol. 6 No. 1 (2026): Moderation: Journal of Islamic Studies Review
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen PTKIS Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63195/moderation.v6i1.176

Abstract

This article examines Human Rights (HAM) and Equality in Sharia according to Yudian Wahyudi and Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im. According to an-Na’im, human rights are universal as a minimum ethical standard that must be met by all legal systems, including Islamic law. Sharia must be reformed so as not to conflict with the principles of gender equality, religious freedom, and non-discrimination. An-Na’im does not hesitate to directly criticize classical Islamic legal texts. Meanwhile, Yudian presents a style of Islamic legal approach that is sourced from the Islamic treasure, namely ushul fiqh, not hermeneutics. According to him, maqasid sharia is actually the correct method in the exploration (al-istinbati) and application (at-tabiqi) of Islamic law. Thus, the difference between Yudian and an-Na’im lies in the level of methodological radicalism and the basis of normative legitimacy. Yudian tends to maintain continuity with the tradition of ushul fiqh and the authority of texts, while an-Na’im is more daring in deconstructing the normative structure of classical sharia. However, the two agreed that formalizing sharia as state law was not an ideal solution to the problems of modern Muslims. Yudian maintained continuity with the traditions of ushul fiqh and the authority of texts. His thinking style was characterized by continuity (istimrar), change (taghayyur), and transcendence (muta’alin), complemented by comparison and contrast. He pursued the maqasid of sharia in Yudian's style, using maqasid sharia as a method. Theoretically, the synthesis of Yudian's and an-Na’im's thinking opens the opportunity for a more comprehensive model of Islamic legal reform. From Yudian, we can draw a contextual maqasid sharia approach that is sensitive to local realities. From an-Na’im, we can draw a strong commitment to equality, freedom, and human dignity as universal ethical principles. This synthesis does not eliminate differences, but rather leverages the strengths of each approach to more comprehensively address legal and humanitarian challenges.
Co-Authors David, Mohammad Ibrahim Fikma Edrisy Mubarak, Muhammad Rafi Sadari Sadari, Sadari