%0 Thesis
%9 Skripsi
%A Yolanda Evrie Elfayanti, NIM.: 22103080094
%B FAKULTAS SYARI’AH DAN HUKUM
%D 2026
%F digilib:77220
%I UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA
%K Redenominasi Rupiah, Non-Decision Making, Dinamika Hukum, Maqāshid asy-Syarī'ah, Kebijakan Publik
%P 146
%T DEKONSTRUKSI PERSISTENSI KEBIJAKAN TANPA KEPUTUSAN DALAM WACANA REDENOMINASI RUPIAH
%U https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/77220/
%X Discussions regarding the redenomination of the rupiah have been ongoing for more than fifteen years, spanning the administrations of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, Joko Widodo, and Prabowo Subianto, without a final decision having been reached. This phenomenon presents a policy anomaly, although Articles 22–29 of Law No 7 of 2011 on Currency have provided legal legitimacy and macroeconomic indicators have been sufficient, discussions on the Redenomination Bill have consistently stalled in the Medium-Term Legislative Program. The existence of a policy that appears to be stuck between formulation and implementation reflects a phenomenon of non-decision making.  This study aims to analyze the legal dynamics and factors contributing to the persistence of this discourse throughout the period 2010–2025, as well as to evaluate it from the perspective of Islamic law. This study is a descriptive-analytical normative legal study (library research). The approach used encompasses three dimensions: the statutory approach, the longitudinal comparative approach, and the Islamic approach. The theoretical framework employed is interdisciplinary, integrating public policy theory, the Political Business Cycle, the Multiple Streams Framework, and the Governmental Politics Model, all of which are operationalized within the framework of Imam al-Shatibi’s maqāshid asy-syarī’ah. Data is analyzed using descriptive-comparative methods, content analysis, causal process tracing, and Islamic normative analysis.  This study summarizes three fundamental findings. From a legal perspective, Articles 22–29 of Law No. 7 of 2011 have structural weaknesses as non-self-executing legislation containing elastic phrases without objective indicators, thereby creating a condition of lex imperfecta that undermines the principle of legal certainty as stipulated in Article 28D (1) of the 1945 Constitution. The persistence of the discourse is driven by a triangulation of obstacles, including the Political Business Cycle mechanism, the failure of the policy window, and inter-institutional policy deadlock (between the Ministry of Finance, the Bank of Indonesia, and the House of Representatives). Redenomination tends to be used as a symbolic measure when the economy weakens, without any genuine intent for implementation. From the perspective of Islamic economic law, this uncertainty is deemed to violate the principles of maqāshid asy-syarī’ah because it creates excessive uncertainty (gharar fahish), leads to wastefulness (isrāf), and contradicts the principle of lā ḍarara wa lā ḍirār. Based on an analysis of maṣlaḥah and mafsadah, this state of non-decision-making is normatively unjustifiable in Islam because its mafsadah outweighs the potential maslahah expected.
%Z Muhammad Ulul Albab Musaffa, Lc., M.H.