<![CDATA[This article examines the interpretation of regulatory and legal acts in Islamic law, the Romano-Germanic legal tradition, and the Anglo-Saxon legal tradition in the context of contemporary digital legal challenges. The study is based on the research gap that previous studies have generally examined these legal traditions separately, while limited attention has been given to how they reinterpret existing legal norms when facing similar new problems, such as artificial intelligence, crypto-assets, smart contracts, and electronic evidence. Using a normative juridical method supported by a comparative legal approach and limited content analysis, this article compares the sources of law, subjects of interpretation, dominant interpretative methods, institutional authority, and flexibility of each legal tradition. The study finds that Islamic law emphasizes moral legitimacy and public benefit through ijtihad, maslahah, and maqasid al-sharia; the Romano-Germanic tradition prioritizes legal certainty through codified norms, systematic interpretation, and teleological reasoning; while the Anglo-Saxon tradition offers flexibility through precedent, purposive reasoning, and case-based development of law. The article argues that no single legal tradition provides a complete model for interpreting law in the digital era. A more adaptive model requires the combination of normative certainty, institutional consistency, interpretative flexibility, and value-based justice. These findings contribute to comparative legal scholarship and provide a conceptual basis for improving legal interpretation in modern law enforcement and regulatory reform.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
