The Regulatory Framework Governing Traditional Arbitration in Resolving Islamic Banking Disputes in Malaysia: The Time for Change
Introduction to The Problem: Malaysia has established its place as a global leader in Islamic banking due to the considerable efforts made by the Malaysian lawmakers to enhance the Islamic banking dispute resolution framework and provide the Islamic banking disputants with several resolution mechanisms, such as traditional arbitration. However, using traditional arbitration in resolving Islamic banking disputes is not free from criticisms. Therefore, there is a need to find an alternative or enhanced form of traditional arbitration mechanism.
Purpose/Objective Study: This article examines the regulatory framework governing traditional arbitration in resolving Islamic banking disputes in Malaysia.
Design/Methodology/Approach: This article is based on doctrinal legal research Methodology. Primary data was secured from several sources, such as Acts, Laws, and Court Cases. While secondary data was collected from books, journal articles, and online databases. Both data are analyzed by using critical and analytical approaches.
Findings: It is found that Arbitration Act 2005 (Act 646) and I-Arbitration Rules 2018 have been subjected to several amendments to align with the international norms and best practices. However, Malaysian lawmakers should start thinking out of the box by reinforcing the Islamic banking disputants with an effective resolution mechanism known as electronic arbitration (hereinafter referred to as “e-arbitration”). Doing so would facilitate prompt access to justice in Islamic banking disputes in Malaysia.
Paper Type: Research Article
Al-shibli, F. S. (2017). the Role of Arbitration in Settling the Dispute of Islamic Banking. Journal of Humanities, Language, Culture and Business, 1(2), 221–229.
Al-Shibli, F. S. (2018). Litigation or Arbitration for Resolving Islamic Banking Disputes. Arab Law Quarterly, 32(4), 413–438. https://doi.org/10.1163/15730255-12324040
Al Hamed, M. (2016). Electronic arbitration as A Solution for Electronic Commerce Dispute Resolution in the United Arab Emirates: Obstacles and Enforceability Challenges. University of Gloucestershire.
Ali, E. R. A. E., Oseni, U. A., Adeyemi, A. A., & Mohd. Zein, N. R. (2016). Disputre Resolution Mechanism in the Islamic Finance Industry in Malaysia: Towards a Legal Framework. Al-Shajarah: Journal of Islamic Thought and Civilization of the International Islamic University Malaysia (ISTAC), 43(Special Issue), 19–40.
Ali, S., Mohamed Yusoff, Z., & Ayub, Z. (2017). Legal Research of Doctrinal and Non-Doctrinal. International Journal of Trend in Research and Development, 4(1), 493–495.
Allie, S. (2020). Exploring the concept of conciliation (sulh) as a method of alternative dispute resolution in Islamic Law. University of Western Cape.
Arifin, M., & Mansar, A. (2019). Features of arbitration in Islamic law when resolving disputes in muamalah. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 9(10), 295–311.
Asian International Arbitration Centre. (2018). The Arbitration (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 2018 Comes Into Force – The New Era of Arbitration in Malaysia.
Asian International Arbitration Centre. (2020). Virtual Reality Unlocking Potentials for ADR.
Asian International Arbitration Centre. (2021). I Arbitration Rules. Asian International Arbitration Centre.
Bello, A. T. (2018). Online Dispute Resolution Algorithm: The Artificial Intelligence Model as a Pinnacle. Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management, 84(2), 159–168.
Born, G. B. (2009). International Commercial Arbitration (1st ed.). Kluwer Law Inernational.
Born, G. B. (2010). International Arbitration and Forum Selection Agreements: Drafting and Enforcing (3rd ed.). Kluwer Law Inernational.
Dahlan, N. K. (2018). Alternative Dispute Resolution for Islamic Finance in Malaysia. MATEC Web of Conferences, 150, 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201815005077
Ecourt-The Online Justice System. (2021a). How it Works.
Ecourt-The Online Justice System. (2021b). How Long Does it Take.
Ecourt-The Online Justice System. (2021c). The Legality of the Rulings.
Ecourt-The Online Justice System. (2021d). Who Can Use It.
Fortese, F., & Hemmi, L. (2015). Procedural Fairness and Efficiency in International Arbitration. Groningen Journal of International Law, 3(1), 110. https://doi.org/10.21827/5a86a89d8e651
Hua, T. C. (2018). Challenges against arbitral awards in Malaysia. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Husseini, S. A., Fam, S. F., Ahmat, N. N., Azmi, F. R., Prastyo, D. D., & Yanto, H. (2019). Islamic banking revolution in Malaysia: A review. Humanities and Social Sciences Reviews, 7(4), 267–275. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.7434
Idid, D. S. A., & Oseni, U. A. (2014). the Arbitration (Amendment) Act 2011: Limiting Court Intervention in Arbitral. The Malayan Law Journal, 2, 1–21.
Khakimov, S. (2020). Arbitration (Tahkim) and Reconciliation (Sulh) in Islam As Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms. The Light of Islam, 2020(4), 31–37. https://doi.org/10.47980/tloi/2020/4/20
Khoukaz, G. (2017). Sharia Law and International Commercial Arbitration: The Need for an Intra-Islamic Arbitral Institution. Journal of Dispute Resolution, 2017(1), 1–17.
Komijani, A., & Taghizadeh-Hesary, F. (2018). An overview of Islamic banking and finance in Asia. In ADBI Working Paper Series (No. 853). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315543222-28
Labanieh, M. F., Hussain, M. A., & Mahdzir, N. (2019). Arbitration as a Mechanism to Resolve Islamic Banking Dispute in Malaysia: Challenges and Drawbacks. UUM Journal of Legal Studies, 10(2), 19–44.
Labanieh, M. F., Hussain, M. A., & Mahdzir, N. (2020). E-Arbitration: A way forward to improve quality and service delivery in Malaysian dispute resolution industry. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 9(3), 136–141.
Labanieh, M. F., Hussain, M. A., & Mahdzir, N. (2021). Does E-Arbitration Provide a Suitable Response for the “New Normal” Phenomenon During the Era of Covid-19 Pandemic? International Journal of Law, Government and Communication, 6(22), 215–226. https://doi.org/10.35631/ijlgc.6220021
Link, M., & Haftel, Y. Z. (2019). Islamic legal tradition and the choice of investment arbitration forums. Review of International Political Economy, 28(3), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2019.1679223
Mahdi, Z., & Hak, N. A. (2006). Tahkim ( Arbitration ) in Islamic Law within the Context of Family Disputes. Arab Law Quarterly, 20(1), 2–42.
Maita, A. (2014). Arbitration of Islamic Financial Disputes. Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law, 20(1), 35–71.
Mohamed, A. M. T., Makhtar, M., Hamid, N. A., & Asari, K. N. (2015). Arbitration as a method of dispute settlement in Islamic banking and finance: A perspective from Malaysian governing law. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 23(Special Issue 11), 153–164.
Mohamed, K. (2016). Combining Methods in Legal Research. The Social Science, 11(21).
Oseni, U. A., & Ahmad, A. U. F. (2012). Blazing the Trail : The Institutional Framework for Dispute Resolution in Malaysia’s Islamic Finance Industry. ISRA International Journal of Islamic Finance, 4(2), 159–165. https://doi.org/10.12816/0002753
Peter Berger, K. (2018). Institutional arbitration: harmony, disharmony and the ‘Party Autonomy Paradox.’ Arbitration International, 34(4), 473–493. https://doi.org/10.1093/arbint/aiy028
Pradhan, A. (2018). Malaysia. In J. H. Carter (Ed.), International Arbitration Review (9th ed.). Law Business Research Ltd.
Rajoo, S. (2009). Law, Practice and Procedure of Arbitration-The Arbitration Act 2005 Perspective. Malayan Law Journal, 2(February), 136–161.
Rajoo, S. (2010). Institutional and Ad hoc Arbitrations: Advantages and Disadvantages. The Law Review, 547–558.
Rajoo, S. (2019). Arbitration in Malaysia. Arbitration Journal, 5, 23–33.
Rajoo, S., & Choy, C. Y. (2018). Malaysia. In G. F. Bell (Ed.), The UNCITRAL Model Law and Asian Arbitration Laws Implementation and Comparisons. Cambridge University Press.
Rosli, I. C. (2021). International commercial arbitration in malaysia.Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 29(2), 135–148. https://doi.org/10.47836/pjssh.29.s2.10
Schroeter, U. G. (2018). Ad Hoc or Institutional Arbitration - A Clear-Cut Distinction? Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal, 10(2), 141–199. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3086537
Seyadi, R. M. (2019). Intellectual Composition of Arbitral Tribunals According to the New Saudi Arbitration Law. Arab Law Quarterly, 33(1), 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1163/15730255-12331028
Shokrani, M. (2018). Institutional arbitration versus ad hoc arbitration: Chinese and Iranian perspectives. Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 3(4), 148–154. https://doi.org/10.26500/jarssh-03-2018-0404
Strong, S. I. (2012). Does Class Arbitration “Change the Nature” of Arbitration? Stolt-Nielsen, AT&T, and a Return to First Principles. Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 17(Spring), 201–272.
Yaqin, A. (2007). Legal Research and Writing. Lexis Nexis.
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2021 Jurnal Hukum Novelty
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Hukum Novelty
ISSN 1412-6834 (Print)
ISSN 2550-0090 (Online)
This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Hukum Novelty has been covered by the following indexing site:
Jurnal Hukum Novelty is member of: