Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.61
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal POLITICA: Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara dan Politik Islam Hakamain: Journal of Sharia and Law Studies
Fata, Ikmal
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Humanities Economics, Econometrics & Finance Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Dualisme Kewenangan dalam Pengawasan Lembaga Keuangan Mikro Syariah di Indonesia Fata, Ikmal; Diana, Isna; Pratama, Aditya Ilham; Hasibuan, Taufiq Hidayat; Alfariki, Sofyan Wegi
Politica: Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara dan Politik Islam Vol 11 No 2 (2024): POLITICA: Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara dan Politik Islam
Publisher : Prodi Tata Negara (Siyasah) IAIN Langsa

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32505/politica.v11i2.10926

Abstract

The dualism of authority in supervising Sharia Microfinance Institutions (LKMS) in Indonesia creates legal uncertainty and weak oversight. Kemenkop UKM and OJK have different perceptions regarding the regulation of LKMS, leading to overlapping authority. This situation has the potential to hinder the development of LKMS and reduce public trust in the Sharia financial system. LKMS, such as Baitul Maal wat Tamwil (BMT), play a strategic role in empowering the community’s economy and promoting Sharia financial inclusion. However, the regulation and supervision of these institutions often overlap due to differing perceptions of authority. Kemenkop UKM considers BMT to be part of a cooperative under its supervision, while OJK views BMT as a financial entity requiring more technical oversight related to financial services. This study employs a legal-normative method with a descriptive analysis approach, examining documents such as books, legislation, and other relevant materials. The findings indicate that this overlap in authority results in legal uncertainty, weak supervision, and potential risks for customers. The impacts include unclear legal protection for consumers, risks of authority misuse, and low compliance with Sharia financial regulations. Furthermore, this condition may hinder the growth of LKMS, reduce public confidence, and slow down efforts to enhance Sharia financial inclusion. Harmonizing regulations and establishing coordination mechanisms between Kemenkop UKM and OJK are essential to strengthening supervision and ensuring the sustainability of LKMS. Regulatory harmonization is crucial in promoting better governance and increasing public trust in Indonesia’s Sharia microfinance system.
Dualisme Kewenangan dalam Pengawasan Lembaga Keuangan Mikro Syariah di Indonesia Fata, Ikmal; Diana, Isna; Pratama, Aditya Ilham; Hasibuan, Taufiq Hidayat; Alfariki, Sofyan Wegi
Politica: Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara dan Politik Islam Vol 11 No 2 (2024): POLITICA: Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara dan Politik Islam
Publisher : Prodi Tata Negara (Siyasah) IAIN Langsa

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32505/politica.v11i2.10926

Abstract

The dualism of authority in supervising Sharia Microfinance Institutions (LKMS) in Indonesia creates legal uncertainty and weak oversight. Kemenkop UKM and OJK have different perceptions regarding the regulation of LKMS, leading to overlapping authority. This situation has the potential to hinder the development of LKMS and reduce public trust in the Sharia financial system. LKMS, such as Baitul Maal wat Tamwil (BMT), play a strategic role in empowering the community's economy and promoting Sharia financial inclusion. However, the regulation and supervision of these institutions often overlap due to differing perceptions of authority. Kemenkop UKM considers BMT to be part of a cooperative under its supervision, while OJK views BMT as a financial entity requiring more technical oversight related to financial services. This study employs a legal-normative method with a descriptive analysis approach, examining documents such as books, legislation, and other relevant materials. The findings indicate that this overlap in authority results in legal uncertainty, weak supervision, and potential risks for customers. The impacts include unclear legal protection for consumers, risks of authority misuse, and low compliance with Sharia financial regulations. Furthermore, this condition may hinder the growth of LKMS, reduce public confidence, and slow down efforts to enhance Sharia financial inclusion. Harmonizing regulations and establishing coordination mechanisms between Kemenkop UKM and OJK are essential to strengthening supervision and ensuring the sustainability of LKMS. Regulatory harmonization is crucial in promoting better governance and increasing public trust in Indonesia's Sharia microfinance system.
Substantive Legal Analysis of Judicial Decisions in Breach of Contract Disputes: A Case Study of the Surabaya High Court Firmansyah, Aldi; Fata, Ikmal; Rosidah, Aimmatur; Oktari Matahari, Ladisa
Hakamain: Journal of Sharia and Law Studies Vol. 4 No. 2 (2025): July-December 2025
Publisher : Yayasan Lembaga Studi Makwa

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.57255/hakamain.v4i1.1454

Abstract

This study aims to analyse the legal considerations of judges in cases of breach of cooperation agreements, particularly in relation to the dominance of the principle of legal certainty over the principles of justice and benefit. The focus of the study is to determine the extent to which judges' decisions reflect a balance between normative aspects and substantive justice. The method used is a normative legal approach by examining laws, regulations, doctrines, and court decisions related to the object of research. Data sources were obtained through literature studies using books, laws, papers, journals, and other secondary sources. The results of the study indicate that the judge's decision in case No. 521/Pdt.G/2021/PN.Sby emphasised legal certainty through procedural and formal analysis, so that the aspects of justice and utility were not the main considerations. The judge tended to ignore substantive justice and dismissed the lawsuit as premature, so that the plaintiff did not obtain their rights. These findings indicate limitations in the application of the principles of justice and utility when judges are bound by textual requirements. This research contributes to strengthening the discourse on the importance of balancing legal certainty, justice, and utility in civil law enforcement. The originality of this research lies in its in-depth analysis of judges' legal argumentation practices in default cases using a substantive law approach.
Co-Authors Alfariki, Sofyan Wegi Diana, Isna Firmansyah, Aldi Hasibuan, Taufiq Hidayat Oktari Matahari, Ladisa Pratama, Aditya Ilham Rosidah, Aimmatur