<![CDATA[This study examines the regulation of polygamy within the transformation of contemporary Islamic family law from formal legality toward substantive family protection, focusing on its implications for gender equality, judicial accountability, and family resilience. The study addresses the gap in existing scholarship that tends to discuss legal permissibility, judicial practice, and socio-familial consequences separately without integrating them into a comparative socio-legal framework. Using doctrinal legal research with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, this article analyzes the regulatory models of Indonesia, Tunisia, and Morocco by examining judicial authorization mechanisms, evidentiary standards, institutional safeguards, and the protection of wives and children. The novelty of this study lies in positioning family resilience as an evaluative socio-legal framework for assessing the effectiveness of polygamy regulation, thereby extending comparative Islamic family law discourse beyond debates on textual permissibility toward the broader issue of substantive justice and family protection. The findings demonstrate that Indonesia adopts a permission-based model whose protective function remains vulnerable when judicial review is limited to procedural verification; Tunisia applies a prohibitive model that prioritizes preventive legal certainty and monogamous family stability; while Morocco develops a restrictive permission model based on substantive judicial scrutiny, exceptional reasons, financial proof, transparency, and recognition of women’s legal agency. The study concludes that the effectiveness of polygamy regulation depends not merely on the degree of legal restriction, but on the interaction between regulatory design, judicial quality, institutional enforcement, and socio-cultural legitimacy in protecting household stability, gender equality, and the welfare of wives and children.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
