Sharia Principles and Evaluation in MBG Conflict Resolution: Procedural Compliance, Tabayyun, and Collective Gratitude

Abstract

The implementation of large-scale public programs, such as the Free Nutritious Meal (MBG) Program, requires not only operational readiness but also a clear ethical and procedural framework to prevent institutional conflict and ensure accountability. This study aims to examine and evaluate how Sharia-based ethical and procedural principles—namely Procedural Obedience, Tabayyun (verification), and Collective Gratitude—function in resolving institutional conflict and strengthening accountability within the implementation of the MBG Program. Employing a qualitative case study approach, this research was conducted at the Mutiara Islam Cileungsi Foundation, where individual interventions nearly invalidated the cooperation agreement with the Kitchen Provider (SPPG). Data were collected through document analysis, including memoranda of understanding, meeting minutes, and questionnaires, and were analyzed thematically using a framework integrating Sharia principles with the Program and Educational Evaluation (PEP) perspective. The results show that individual intervention constituted a violation of Procedural Obedience, particularly MOU Point 7, while public anxiety (khīfah) was effectively addressed through institutional Tabayyun via SLHS verification. The findings further indicate that conflict resolution was successfully achieved through Musyawarah (Syura), emphasizing Collective Gratitude, as reflected in 89.44% of students expressing agreement with the resolution outcome. This study implies that the sustainability and effectiveness of public programs depend on strict ethical discipline and procedural compliance. Sharia principles offer a robust normative foundation for PEP in strengthening transparency, restoring public trust, and promoting collective welfare in public policy implementation.