@phdthesis{digilib75901,
           month = {January},
           title = {PROBLEMATIKA IMPLEMENTASI OTONOMI KHUSUS PAPUA PASCA PERUBAHAN KEDUA UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 21 TAHUN 2001 PERSPEKTIF MASLAHAH MURSALAH},
          school = {UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA},
          author = {NIM.: 21103070024 Shafa Putri Widodo},
            year = {2026},
            note = {Dr. Gugun El Guyanie, S.HI., LL.M.},
        keywords = {otonomi khusus; problematika; papua; maslahah mursalah},
             url = {https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/75901/},
        abstract = {The Special Autonomy policy in Papua has been in place for more than two decades since the enactment of Law Number 21 of 2001. Over time, this regulation has undergone two significant amendments, the latest being through Law Number 2 of 2021, as an effort by the government to accelerate development and welfare in the Papua region. However, despite the increasing allocation of fiscal funds and the expansion of the bureaucracy through the establishment of New Autonomous Regions (DOB), the implementation of special autonomy is still considered stagnant, suboptimal, and has not yet achieved its original goals, namely regarding the protection, empowerment, and advocacy for the Indigenous Papuans (OAP).
This study employs a type of research known as literature review or library research with a juridical-normative approach that examines the theory of special autonomy as an analytical tool. Legislation serves as the primary material, while literature such as books, articles, and scientific works serves as secondary material. The nature of the research is descriptive-analytical, which then describes the existing object data and is subsequently analyzed from the perspective of maslahah mursalah.
The results of this study indicate that: first, affirmative policies and favoritism towards the Indigenous Papuans (OAP) have not been fulfilled optimally and effectively. The implementation of Papua's special autonomy also still shows a failure to meet the standards of special autonomy substantially if based on the principles put forward by Lauri Hannikainen. Second, at the level of implementation, the conditions of maslahah mursalah according to Al-Ghazali have not been fully met. The failure to protect basic needs (dharuriyah) and the uneven distribution of benefits shows that the implementation of Papua's special autonomy post the second amendment is still far from the ideals of welfare principles.}
}