KEBIJAKAN HUKUM PENGGUNAAN GANJA UNTUK MEDIS: STUDI KOMPARASI INDONESIA DAN THAILAND PERSPEKTIF QIYAS DAN EFEKTIVITAS HUKUMNIM.: 22103060013Muhammad Zanjani AbdullahauthorThe use of medical cannabis in the development of modern health law is regarded as one of the alternative treatments that continues to evolve alongside advances in science and technology. However, the legal policies governing medical cannabis in Indonesia and Thailand differ significantly. Indonesia continues to classify cannabis as a Category I Narcotic under Law Number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics, thereby prohibiting its use for medical services. In contrast, Thailand has permitted the use of cannabis for medical purposes through a regulatory framework accompanied by state supervision. These differences raise questions regarding the factors that have led to the divergent policies of the two countries and the legal reasoning underlying these policies from the perspective of qiyās. This study is qualitative research employing a normative juridical approach and focusing on library research. It is descriptive, analytical, and comparative in nature. Data were collected through document analysis of legislation, court decisions, books, academic journals, and other relevant literature. This study applies Soerjono Soekanto’s theory of legal effectiveness to analyze the factors contributing to the differences in legal policies, while the theory of qiyās in Islamic legal theory (uṣūl al-fiqh) is used to examine the legal reasoning underlying the regulation of medical cannabis in Indonesia and Thailand. The findings reveal that the differences in medical cannabis policies between Indonesia and Thailand are influenced by legal factors, social factors, and law enforcement factors. Indonesia maintains a prohibition policy due to regulations classifying cannabis as a Category I Narcotic, a legal culture that continues to associate cannabis with negative stigma, and the orientation of law enforcement institutions toward preventing narcotics abuse. In contrast, Thailand has adopted a more flexible policy by considering scientific developments, public acceptance of cannabis as part of traditional medicine, and government policies supporting the medical use of cannabis under state supervision. From the perspective of qiyās, both countries recognize khamr as the al-aṣl (original case) and acknowledge its prohibition based on the Qur'an and Sunnah. The difference lies in the determination of the 'illah (effective legal cause). Indonesia considers the 'illah underlying the prohibition of khamr to remain applicable to cannabis, thereby maintaining its prohibition policy. Meanwhile, Thailand distinguishes between medical and recreational use, resulting in a more permissive policy regarding the medical use of cannabis.340 Ilmu Hukum362.293 Permasalahan Narkotik, Narkoba, Narkotika dan Obat-obat Terlarang2026-07-02UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA;FAKULTAS SYARIAH DAN HUKUMThesis