Article Sidebar

Submitted
January 16, 2026
Accepted
March 9, 2026
Published
March 11, 2026
Download
Statistic
Read Counter : 53

Main Article Content

Abstract

Purpose - This study aims to analyze the conflict of jurisdiction between the National Sharia Arbitration Board (Basyarnas) and the Religious Courts in the resolution of sharia economic disputes, particularly regarding the effectiveness of arbitration clauses when such institutions are not structurally available in certain regions. The focus of the study is directed at the judges’ legal considerations in Supreme Court Decisions No. 159 K/Ag/2021 and No. 175 K/Ag/2021.


Methods - The research employs a normative legal method using a statutory and case study approach, focusing on Supreme Court Decisions No. 159 K/Ag/2021 and No. 175 K/Ag/2021. The analysis utilizes Friedman’s legal system theory and Radbruch’s legal objectives to examine the rationality of the judges’ considerations.


Findings - The results of this study found that the structural absence of Basyarnas in a region constitutes the primary ratio decidendi for judges to assume adjudicatory authority. Within Friedman’s framework, there is an interaction between the limitations of the legal structure and a responsive legal culture, which prompts judges to engage in legal discovery through the interpretation of Article 1344 of the Civil Code. Based on Radbruch’s conceptual framework, the judge’s legal balancing, in its implications, incorporates legal objectives within a framework aimed at achieving substantive justice for the aggrieved party; the utility-oriented nature of the decision provides practical benefits for the disputing parties; and certainty ensures that regulations are clearly formulated and not open to multiple interpretations, thereby providing legal certainty for the litigants as subjects of law.


Research contribution/limitations - This study is limited to a normative analysis of specific cases; therefore, generalizations are limited.


Originality/value - This study demonstrates that under conditions of institutional limitations, judges tend to prioritize substantive justice and the effectiveness of dispute resolution over formal legal certainty

Keywords

Basyarnas Arbitration Clause Judicial Reasoning Sharia Economic Dispute

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Muhammad Fakhril Umam, Dhika Tabrozi, Roisul Umam Arrasyidi, Wijdan Hibatulloh al-Wafa

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
How to Cite
Muhammad Fakhril Umam, Dhika Tabrozi, Roisul Umam Arrasyidi, & Wijdan Hibatulloh al-Wafa. (2026). BETWEEN SHARIA ARBITRATION AND RELIGIOUS COURTS: JURISDICTIONAL CONFLICT AND JUDICIAL CONSIDERATIONS ON ARBITRATION CLAUSES IN SUPREME COURT DECISIONS. Al-Mawarid Jurnal Syariah Dan Hukum (JSYH), 8(1). https://doi.org/10.20885/mawarid.vol8.iss1.art10
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Abu Bakar, Lastuti, and Tri Handayani. 2021. “Integrated Alternative Dispute Resolution Institutions in the Financial Services Sector: Dispute Resolution Efforts in Consumer Protection Framework.” Yustisia: Jurnal Hukum 10(1):32–47. doi: 10.20961/yustisia.v10i1.48684.
  2. Afifullah, Muhammad, Imam Haryanto, and Muthia Sakti. 2024. “Eksistensi Badan Arbitrase Syariah Nasional Majelis Ulama Indonesia Pasca UU 04 Tahun 2023 Dan POJK No 61 Tahun 2020.” Pp. 466–76 in National Conference on Law Studies (NCOLS).
  3. Afsaloka, Tetri Mutiara. 2025. “Pelaksanaan Putusan Arbitrase Syariah Internasional Di Indonesia.” Ariyah: Jurnal Hukum Ekonomi Bissnis 1(2):123–32. doi: 10.36908/ariyah.v1i2.1606.
  4. Al-Anshori, Huzaimah, Emi Puasa Handayani, and Gautam Kumar Jha. 2024. “Reformulation of Commercial Court Authority Regulations Relation to the Arbitration Clause.” Journal of Law and Legal Reform 5(1):305–20. doi: https://doi.org/10.15294/jllr.vol5i1.2144.
  5. Almaududi, Almaududi. 2024. “Intersection of Jurisdiction in Resolving Sharia Banking Disputes in General Court: Titik Singgung Wewenang Penyelesaian Sengketa Perbankan Syariah Di Peradilan Umum.” Jurnal Konstitusi 21(2):258–74. doi: https://doi.org/10.31078/jk2126.
  6. Amandossuly, Bagdat, Karlygash Baizhomartova, Zhanat Zhailau, Lyazzat Nyssanbekova, and Aidana Otynshiyeva. 2025. “Legal Challenges and Developments in the WTO Dispute Resolution Mechanism.” Khazanah Hukum 7(1):46–60. doi: https://doi.org/10.15575/kh.v7i1.39633.
  7. Anwar, Qosim Khoiri, and M. Usman. 2021. “Perbedaan Penafsiran Hukum Hakim Pengadilan Tinggi Dan Hakim Pengadilan Tingkat Pertama (Putusan Nomor: 63/Pdt.G/2011/PTA.Yk Dan Nomor: 0463/Pdt.G/2011/PA.Btl, Terkait Perkara Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah).” Al-Mustashfa: Jurnal Penelitian Hukum Ekonomi Syariah 6(1):95–109. doi: https://doi.org/10.24235/jm.v6i1.8257.
  8. Arifin, Ridwan, Cahya Wulandari, Indah Sri Utari, and Tri Imam Munandar. 2023. “A Discourse of Justice and Legal Certainty in Stolen Assets Recovery in Indonesia: Analysis of Radbruch’s Formula and Friedman’s Theory.” Volksgeist: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Konstitusi 6(2):159–81. doi: 10.24090/volksgeist.v6i2.9596.
  9. Attsani, Adi Purnomo, Afrizal Rahman, Feralda Septya Alfani, Muhammad Athaillah, Shahibul Hikam, Deni Kamaludin Yusup, and Tatang Astarudin. 2025. “Upaya Hukum Arbitrase Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Bisnis Menurut Hukum Perdata Dan Hukum Islam.” JIMU: Jurnal Ilmiah Multi Disiplin 03(03):2129–40. doi: https://doi.org/10.70294/jimu.v3i03.996.
  10. Basyarnas. 2025. “Basyarnas.” Basyarnas-MUI.
  11. Dewi, Ayu Atika, and Abdul Jamil. 2023. “The Concept of Competence-Competence : An Indonesian Approach.” Pp. 297–306 in International Conference on Advance & Scientific Innovation (ICASI). Vol. 8.
  12. Direktori Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. 2019. Putusan Nomor 99/Pdt.G/2019/MS.Mbo.
  13. Direktori Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. 2020a. Putusan Nomor 407/Pdt.G/2020/PA.Pbr. Jakarta: Direktorat Jenderal Badan Peradilan Agama Mahkamah Agung RI.
  14. Direktori Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. 2020b. Putusan Nomor 52/Pdt.G/2020/MS.Aceh.
  15. Direktori Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. 2020c. Putusan Nomor 70/Pdt.G/2020/PTA.Pbr.
  16. Direktori Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. 2021a. Putusan Nomor 159 K/Ag/2021.
  17. Direktori Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. 2021b. Putusan Nomor 175 K/Ag/2021.
  18. Direktori Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. 2025. “Kategori Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah Yang Memuat Klausula Arbitrase Syariah.”
  19. Elvia, Evi Eka, Abdul Mujib, Azhar Nor, and Muhammad Imanuddin Akbar. 2023. “Basyarnas As a Place for Dispute Resolution of Musyarakah Financing in Sharia Banking in the Disruption Era.” El-Mashlahah 13(1):39–56. doi: 10.23971/el-mashlahah.v13i1.5345.
  20. Faizun, Ahmad. 2021. “Penyelesaian Sengketa Akad Musyarakah Di Badan Arbitrase Syariah Nasional (Analisis Putusan Basyarnas Yogyakarta No X/Tahun 2017).” Al-Ahkam: Jurnal Ilmu Syari’ah Dan Hukum 6(2):195–212. doi: doi.org/10.22515/alahkam.v6i2.3864.
  21. Fakhriah, Efa Laela, and Anita Afriana. 2023. “Cross Border of Jurisdiction between Arbitration and District Court in Business Dispute Settlement under the Indonesian Legal System.” Fiat Justisia: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 17(3):287–98. doi: 10.25041/fiatjustisia.v17no3.3175.
  22. Fitri, Devianty, Thohir Luth, Sihabudin, and Bambang Winarmo. 2022. “The Embodiment of Islamic Personality Principles in Sharia Economic Dispute Resolution in Indonesia.” International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science 11(5):539–44. doi: https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v11i5.1844.
  23. Friedman, Lawrence M. 1975. The Legal System: A Social Science Perspective. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
  24. Harahap, M. Yahya. 2006. Arbitrase Ditinjau Dari Reglemen Acara Perdata (Rv), Peraturan Prosedur BANI, International Centre For The Settlement Of Investmen Disputes (ICSID), UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, Convention On The Recognition And Enforcement Of Foreing Arbitral Award. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
  25. Harahap, Sarah Khairani, and Akhmad Arif Khoirudin. 2024. “Efektivitas Penyelesaian Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah Secara Non-Litigasi Melalui Badan Arbitrase Syariah Nasional.” Yurisprudentia: Jurnal Hukum Ekonomi 10(2):318–40. doi: 10.24952/yuridprudentia.v10i2.13679.
  26. Harir, Moh, Soegianto Soegianto, Zaenal Arifin, Kukuh Sudarmanto, and Miftah Arifin. 2025. “Konflik Norma (Antinomy Normen) Sita Umum Dengan Sita Pidana Dalam Pemberesan Harta Pailit.” Jurnal USM Law Review 8(2):1107–25. doi: https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v8i2.11384.
  27. Hart, HLA. 1972. The Concept of Law. London: The English Language Book Society and Oxford University Press.
  28. Hasanudin, Kamsi, and Ahmad Yani Anshori. 2024. “The Contestation of Legal Foundations in the Resolution of Islamic Economic Disputes in Religious Courts.” Al-Manahij: Jurnal Kajian Hukum Islam 18(2):271–88. doi: https://doi.org/10.24090/mnh.v18i2.11934.
  29. Hayati, Riska Fauziah, and Abdul Mujib. 2022. “Dispute Resolution on Mudarabah Musytarakah Contract on Sharia Insurance in Indonesia: Between Regulation and Practice.” El-Mashlahah 12(1):14–36. doi: 10.23971/elma.v12i1.3795.
  30. Heriyanto, Dodik, Rahadian, and Lubis. 2023. “Arbitrase Online Di Masa Pandemi: Penguatan Peran Basyarnas Dalam Menyelesaikan Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah Lintas Batas Negara.” Zaaken: Journal of Civil and Business Law 4(3):360–79. doi: 10.22437/zaaken.v4i3.27988.
  31. Herliana. 2025. “Enforcing Arbitration Awards: Ensuring Sharia Compliance in Islamic & Secular Jurisdictions.” AHKAM : Jurnal Ilmu Syariah 25(2):301–20. doi: https://doi.org/10.15408/ajis.v25i2.42795.
  32. Herliana, and Meydora Cahya Nugrahenti. 2025. “Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution in Medical Disputes Within Sharia-Compliant Hospitals : The Role of Good Faith in Balancing Patient Justice and Professional Protection.” Mazahib: Jurnal Pemikiran Hukum Islam 24(2):221–47. doi: https://doi.org/10.21093/mj.v24i2.10308.
  33. Herviani, Femilya, Erfaniah Zuhriah, and Raden Cecep Lukman Yasin. 2022a. “Pertimbangan Hakim Dalam Pemberian Dispensasi Nikah Perspektif Teori Sistem Hukum Lawrence M. Friedman Di Pengadilan Agama Malang.” Jurnal Intelektualita: Keislaman, Sosial Dan Sains 11(1):117–27. doi: 10.19109/intelektualita.v11i1.10684.
  34. Herviani, Femilya, Erfaniah Zuhriah, and Raden Cecep Lukman Yasin. 2022b. “Pertimbangan Hakim Dalam Pemberian Dispensasi Nikah Perspektif Teori Sistem Hukum Lawrence M. Friedman Di Pengadilan Agama Malang.” Jurnal Intelektualita: Keislaman, Sosial Dan Sains 11(1):1–23.
  35. Ilhamuna, Mohammad. 2025. “Modernizing Islamic Judicial Administration in the Contemporary Era: An Analysis of Responsive Law and Siyāsah Idāriyyah.” Al-Mawarid: Jurnal Syari’ah & Hukum (JSYH) 7(1):113–34. doi: https://doi.org/10.20885/mawarid.vol7.iss1.art7.
  36. Judijanto, Loso, Rabith Madah Khulaili Harsya, Dwi Kartika Prananingrum, Saryanto, and Rahayu Retnaningsih. 2024. “Analysis of Challenges and Prospects for Dispute Resolution Through the Nasional Sharia Arbitration Board in the Indonesian Legal Context.” West Science Islamic Studies 2(1):80–14. doi: 10.58812/wsiss.v2i01.587.
  37. Kurniawan, Ardian, Dedi Sumanto, Ana Ramadhona, and Hendri K. 2025. “Judicial Disparities in Legal Interpretation: The Application of Progressive Law in Marriage Dispensation Rulings.” Al-Mawarid: Jurnal Syari’ah & Hukum (JSYH) 7(2):203–22. doi: https://doi.org/10.20885/mawarid.vol7.iss2.art1.
  38. Labanieh, Mohamad Fateh, Mohammad Azam Hussain, and Nazli Mahdzir. 2021. “The Regulatory Framework Governing Traditional Arbitration in Resolving Islamic Banking Disputes in Malaysia: The Time for Change.” Jurnal Hukum Novelty 12(2):137–52. doi: https://doi.org/10.26555/novelty.v12i2.a20791.
  39. Lestari, Sri. 2023. “The Legal Certainty for Resolving Consumer and Business Actor Disputes from the Perspective of Social Engineering Justice from Roscoe Pound.” Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum Dan Keadilan 11(3):557–68. doi: https://doi.org/10.29303/ius.v11i3.1309.
  40. Limbong, Idandi, Irfan Maulana Siregar, Chairul Azmi Nasution, Raja Muhammad Fahreza, Muhammad Fadil, and Nurul Kholis. 2024. “Arbitrase Syariah Di Indonesia: Tantangan Dan Solusi Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa.” Mahkamah: Jurnal Riset Ilmu Hukum 1(4):1–10. doi: https://doi.org/10.62383/mahkamah.v1i4.135.
  41. Limbong, Idandi, Irfan Maulana Siregar, Chairul Azmi Nasution, Raja, Muhammad Fahreza, Muhammad Fadil, and Nurul Kholis. 2024. “Arbitrase Syariah Di Indonesia: Tantangan Dan Solusi Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa.” Mahkamah: Jurnal Riset Ilmu Hukum 1(4):1–10. doi: 10.62383/mahkamah.v1i4.135.
  42. Mariantika, Elena, Hasanna Lawang, Syarifa Raehana, and Irfan Ramis. 2024. “Contribution of the National Sharia Arbitration Board (Basyarnas) in Resolf of Sharia Financial Institution Disputes.” Pp. 20–34 in The Intersection of Sharia and Law in Today’s World.
  43. Melisa, Elmi Khoiriyah, Bagus Priyono Pamungkas, Inas Hardianti, and Raesitha Zildjianda. 2023. “Kedudukan Hukum Dalam Mewujudkan Keadilan Dan Kesejahteraan Di Indonesia.” Al-Manhaj: Jurnal Hukum Dan Pranata Sosial Islam 5(1):241–54. doi: 10.37680/almanhaj.v5i1.2084.
  44. Nurhasanah. 2023. “Dualism of Non Litigation Dispute Settlement in Sharia Economics at Basyarnas and Alternatif Dispute Resolution Agencies.” Nurani: Jurnal Kajian Syari’ah Dan Masyarakat 23(2):189–98. doi: 10.19109/nurani.v%vi %i.14880.
  45. Nurjaman, Muhamad Izazi, and Doli Witro. 2022. “Penyelesaian Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah Menurut Fatwa Dewan Syariah Nasional-Majelis Ulama Indonesia (DSN-MUI).” Al-Huquq: Journal of Indonesian Islamic Economic Law 4(1):35–62. doi: https://doi.org/10.19105/alhuquq.v4i1.6107.
  46. Oktaviany, Mega, Muhammad Alif Ramadhan, and Rizkina Zakaria. 2024. “Dispute Resolution of Problem Financing in Indonesian Islamic Banks by Basyarnas.” Bukhori: Kajian Ekonomi Dan Keuangan Islam 3(2):103–10. doi: 10.35912/bukhori.v3i2.2875.
  47. Pratama, Abdul Hakim, Hasbir Paserangi, Adi Nurhani Mufrih, Abdul Halim Talli, and Mohd Al Adib Bin Samuri. 2025. “The Position of Choice of Forum and Alternative Dispute Resolution Principles in Contemporary Sharia-Based Property Dispute.” MILRev: Metro Islamic Law Review 4(1):184–207. doi: 10.32332/milrev.v4i1.10140.
  48. Radbruch, Gustav. 1950. “Legal Philosophy.” Pp. 1–536 in 20th Century The Legal Philosophies Series: Vol. IV. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  49. Ramadhan, M. Syafrie, Bagus Kusumo Hadi, Dino Gautman Raharjo, M. Fadhil Azzam Arfa, and Muhammad Alvin Saputra. 2024. “Dispute Resolution of Mudharabah Contract Financing Through Basyarnas.” Jurnal Justisia Ekonomika: Magister Hukum Ekonomi Syariah 8(1):975–87. doi: https://doi.org/10.30651/justeko.v8i1.21285.
  50. Saepullah, Usep. 2022. “Legal Certainty of Arbitration in the Settlement of Islamic Economic Civil Cases in the Perspective of Positive Law in Indonesia.” Al-’Adalah 19(2):261–90. doi: https://doi.org/10.24042/adalah.v19i2.14384.
  51. Sari, Fara Rizqiyah, and Rayno Dwi Adityo. 2024. “Efektivitas Alat Bukti Elektronik Pada Praktik Beracara Perspektif Teori Sistem Hukum Lawrence M. Friedman.” Sakina: Journal of Family Studies 8(2):244–57.
  52. Sari, Niken Junika, Ahmad Arif Zulfikar, and Sulaiman Dorlah. 2024. “Implementation of International Arbitration Awards in Indonesia from the Perspective of Legal Value Theory.” Jurnal Media Hukum 31(1):167–85. doi: https://doi.org/10.18196/jmh.v31i1.20026.
  53. Setiawan, Peter Jeremiah, Xavier Nugraha, and Elma Putri. 2021. “Reformulation of Dispute Resolution Mechanisms for Public Information Requests to Achieve Constructive Law Enforcement and Legal Certainty.” Substantive Justice International Journal of Law 4(1):25–46. doi: https://doi.org/10.33096/substantivejustice.v4i1.122.
  54. Setyowati, Rof’ah, and Bagya Agung Prabowo. 2021. “Sharia Principles in the Financial Services Authority Regulation on Dispute Settlement Alternatives.” Sriwijaya Law Review 5(1):56–70. doi: 10.28946/slrev.Vol5.Iss1.
  55. Sibarani, William Edward. 2023. “Modern Justice: Indonesia’s Supreme Court’s Challenges to Uphold Fair Trial Principles Through Digitalization.” Brawijaya Law Journal 10(1):106–21. doi: https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.blj.2023.010.01.07.
  56. Sidik, Jafar, Oleg Orlov, Asep Rozali, and Dewi Sulistianingsih. 2024. “Choice of Arbitrators Regarding Dispute Settlement (Comparing Indonesia and Russia).” Journal of Law and Legal Reform 5(1):109–36. doi: https://doi.org/10.15294/jllr.vol5i1.2093.
  57. Soviani, Rahma Yunita, and Ery Agus Priyono. 2022. “The Dispute Settlement through International Arbitration between PT. Karaha Bodas Company against PT. Pertamina and PLN.” Jurnal Daulat Hukum 5(3):184–95. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.306 59/jdh.v5i3.23922.
  58. Sudiarawan, Kadek Agus, Putu Gede Arya Sumerta Yasa, Desak Putu Dewi Kasih, Nyoman Satyayudha Dananjaya, and Ni Ketut Devi Damayanti. 2024. “Formulation of Online Dispute Resolution in Realizing Fair Industrial Relations Dispute Settlement: A Comparative Study.” Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum Dan Keadilan 12(2):227–48. doi: https://doi.org/10.29303/ius.v12i2.1308.
  59. Suganda, Rangga. 2022. “Metode Pendekatan Yuridis Dalam Memahami Sistem Penyelesaian Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah.” Jurnal Ilmiah Ekonomi Islam 8(3):2859–66. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.29040/jiei.v8i3.6485.
  60. Sujayadi, Sujayadi, Tata Wijayanta, and Herliana Herliana. 2023. “Regulating Court Jurisdiction to Protect Weaker Parties: An Overview of the Indonesian Civil Justice System.” Yuridika 38(2):305–32. doi: 10.20473/ydk.v38i2.43835.
  61. Surasa, Ais, Santi Suryani, and Hisam Ahyani. 2022. “Idealitas Penegakan Hukum Yang Baik (Ideal) Menurut Gaya Moral Di Indonesia.” Al-Mawarid: Jurnal Syari’ah & Hukum (JSYH) 3(2):105–18. doi: https://doi.org/10.20885/mawarid.vol3.iss2.art4.
  62. Sutiyoso, Bambang. 2020. Hukum Acara Perdata Khusus Di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: UII Press.
  63. Taufiki, Muhammad, Rokani Darsyah, and Mahmud Ridha. 2022. “The Use of Maxims (Al-Qawāʿid Al-Uṣūliyyah Wa Al-Fiqhiyyah) in Legal Argumentation of Sharia Economic Court Decisions in Indonesia.” Al-Ihkam: Jurnal Hukum Dan Pranata Sosial 17(1):165–88. doi: http://doi.org/10.19105/al-Ihkam.v17i1.6070.
  64. Triana, Nita. 2018. “Urgency of Arbitration Clause in Determining the Resolution of Sharia Economic Disputes.” AHKAM : Jurnal Ilmu Syariah 18(1):65–88. doi: 10.15408/ajis.v18i1.8872.
  65. W, Wahidin, Fifin Anusatu Zahro, Nur Ainun, and Inda Zilarsi. 2025. “Kajian Normatif Yuridis Terhadap Peran Lembaga Arbitrase Syariah Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Perbankan Syariah.” Media Hukum Indonesia 3(4):22–27. doi: 10.5821/zenodo.17157017.
  66. Warman, Arifki Budia, and Riska Fauziah Hayati. 2022. “Tahkim Dalam Standar Syariah Dan Urgensinya Terhadap Penyelesaian Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah Di Indonesia.” Islamika: Jurnal Ilmu-Ilmu Keislaman 22(01):37–58. doi: 10.32939/islamika.v22i01.1246.
  67. Widjaja, Gunawan. 2008. Seri Aspek Hukum Dalam Bisnis: Arbitrase VS Pengadilan Persoalan Kompetensi (Absolut) Yang Tidak Pernah Selesai. 1st ed. Jakarta: Kencana.
  68. Widjaja, Gunawan, and Ahmad Yani. 2003. Seri Hukum Bisnis: Hukum Arbitrase. 1st ed. Jakarta: PT RajaGrafindo Persada.
  69. Winarta, Frans Hendra. 2019. Hukum Penyelesaian Sengketa Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia Dan Internasional. 2nd ed. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
  70. Yunita, Ani. 2021. “Efektivitas Penelesaian Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah Melalui Badan Arbitrase Syariah Nasional Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta.” Jurnal Hukum Progresif 9(1):25–36. doi: 10.14710/jhp.9.1.25-35.
No Related Submission Found