The aim of this research was to determine and understand the royalty fees for retail store franchise business in the perspective of Islamic economic law in the city of Makassar. This research was a type of qualitative descriptive research (non-statistical) using normative, phenomenological, and sociological approaches. Findings of this research revealed that: First, the franchise of company X with its franchisee was in accordance with the Islamic law, there was no element of fraud in terms of contracts and agreements which was implemented in transparency. While, the franchise of company Y and its franchisee, there were different perceptions of policies related to the contract and franchise agreement, namely the absence of a written signing so that it was not in accordance with sharia, but both parties agreed on considerations and amendment policies that made specifically by the franchisee. Second, the implementation of royalty fees between the two companies had been carried out in transparency. The difference of both companies and their franchisees was from the policy of late payment of royalty fees. Company X and its franchisee used a maximum three-month deadline with an interest system, this was not adjusted to Islamic law because interest includes usury. Then, company Y and its franchisee would absolutely not use the delay system policy, because the royalty fee would automatically be deducted from the franchisee's cashback by purchasing products at Company Y.

This article aims to determine and understand the position of the guardian in marriage according to the Hanafi and the al-Shafi’i madhhab, and its application to Islamic law (fiqh), as well as its actualization in social life. Furthermore, to obtain data and answers to these problems, descriptive qualitative (non-statistical) research was used, which focused on the normative approach method. The results found a difference between the Hanafi and the al-Shafi’i madhhab in viewing the position of a guardian in a marriage. The Hanafi madhhab views that a guardian in marriage is not a pillar but only a sunnah, hence, the absence of the guardian does not affect the ijab-qabūl. This is in contrast with the al-Shafi’i madhhab perspective, which places the guardian as one of the pillars, and the absence makes the consent of the qabūl invalid. There is also a sense of security that arises as a result of the guardian's permission. Therefore, because marriage is a life decision, women's choices need to be based on the instruction and knowledge of the guardian.