Comparative Halal Product Assurance Governance in Indonesia and Uzbekistan: Between International Trade Obligations and Mill’s Harm Principle
Year: 2026
Type: article
Abstract: This study compares halal product assurance governance in Indonesia and Uzbekistan through the perspectives of international trade obligations and John Stuart Mill's harm principle. It employs normative legal research using comparative, statutory, and conceptual approaches to examine halal certification regulations, state obligations, consumer protection, and international trade. The findings indicate that both countries regard halal certification as a mechanism for protecting Muslim consumers and strengthening participation in the global halal market, although they adopt different governance models. Indonesia has established a comprehensive legal framework that integrates state institutions and religious authorities in the certification process, whereas Uzbekistan continues to strengthen its institutional framework and align its certification system with international halal standards. Halal regulation is consistent with international trade obligations when implemented transparently, proportionately, and without discrimination. From Mill's harm principle, state intervention is justified when necessary to prevent consumer deception, contamination with prohibited substances, and other foreseeable harms. The study recommends harmonizing halal regulations in Indonesia, strengthening the institutional legitimacy of halal certification in Uzbekistan, and expanding bilateral and multilateral cooperation on halal standards and mutual recognition of certification. These measures would support a halal governance framework that balances consumer protection, economic freedom, and compliance with international trade obligations.
Source: Indonesian Private Law Review
Language: English
Subfield: Marketing
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: diamond
OpenAlex ID: W7203660540