<![CDATA[This article examines how maqāṣid al-sharīʿah, classically designed to guide the individual reasoning (ijtihād) of jurists, can be reconstructed to fit modern legislative processes that are institutional, codified, and procedural. The question is significant in Indonesia's plural legal system, in which Islamic legal values coexist with national positive law and frequently generate tension between formal legality and substantive justice. The study applies normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, comparative, and philosophical approaches to the Law on the Formation of Legislation, decisions of the Constitutional Court, the Marriage Law, the Compilation of Islamic Law, Islamic financial regulation, and classical and contemporary uṣūl al-fiqh literature. The findings show that the reconstructions of Ibn ʿĀshūr and Jasser Auda have shifted maqāṣid from a basis for case-specific rulings to a systemic framework applicable to three stages of lawmaking: planning, norm formulation, and post-enactment evaluation. Analysis of family law, comparative Islamic criminal law, and Islamic financial regulation reveals three distinct patterns of institutionalisation. The central challenge lies in two opposing risks: rigid literalism and unaccountable discretion. The article proposes a Maqāṣid Impact Assessment model embedded in the academic paper (naskah akademik), meaningful public participation, and regulatory evaluation, and it positions the normative convergence between maqāṣid and Pancasila as a bridge for integrating public welfare into positive law without sacrificing legal certainty.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
