Sharia Governance and Regulatory Supervision in Islamic Banking: A Comparative Legal Analysis Between Indonesia and Malaysia
A Comparative Legal Analysis Between Indonesia and Malaysia
Keywords:
sharia governance, fiduciary duty, strict liability, indonesia, malaysiaAbstract
This study aims to critically analyze and compare the legal frameworks for Sharia governance and regulatory oversight in Islamic banking between Indonesia and Malaysia. This normative-doctrinal legal research employs a statutory analysis of Indonesia’s Law No. 21/2008 and Malaysia’s IFSA 2013, combined with a comparative approach. Indonesia’s decentralized-partnership model is flexible but prone to regulatory lag and limited liability for the Sharia board. Conversely, Malaysia’s two-tier centralized model ensures immediate legal certainty but risks triggering defensive Sharia oversight due to the aggressive personal strict criminal liability imposed under Section 28 of the IFSA 2013. This study highlights the paradigm shift in the supervisory body’s fiduciary duty, evolving from a purely advisory role in Indonesia to that of strict compliance officers in Malaysia. It proposes the concepts of a “Structural Regulatory Bridge” and “Proportional Civil Liability” to reform Indonesia’s Sharia governance without stifling product innovation in the Islamic financial sector.