Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study aims to examine the legal recognition, regulatory mechanisms, and practical challenges of time-bound waqf in Indonesia. Employing a normative-empirical legal research methodology with a qualitative case study approach in Banten, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders—including waqf scholars, nazir, and donors—alongside legal document analysis. Although Law No. 41 of 2004 and Government Regulation No. 25 of 2018 acknowledge temporary waqf, neither provides operational guidelines regarding duration limits, asset return procedures, or management standards. This regulatory gap creates legal uncertainty for donors (wakif) and managers (nazir), limiting the scalability of temporary waqf. Empirical findings in Banten demonstrate strong public reception toward temporary cash waqf in education, healthcare, and microfinance sectors. However, structural factors—specifically statutory ambiguity, low nazir professionalism, and absent digital reporting systems—weaken institutional trust. To optimize its socio-economic impact, Indonesia urgently requires regulatory reforms establishing clear operational guidelines, permitted investment portfolios, and standardized reporting mechanisms in alignment with maqāṣid al-sharīʿah
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Atikah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: