Procedure rather than substance is often emphasized in the enactment of law. As a result, the law may not necessarily meet the society's hope of justice. Applying the sociology of law, this study examines the enactment of regional shari'a-based bylaws. This study shows that shari'a bylaws are not well composed. Their legislation does not mirror the justice. This study argues that imbalance in adopting procedural and substantial considerations in the law-making process create problems. Merely emphasizing the procedure in legislation may result in strict and rigid law while stressing substantive arguments in legislation may cause absolute law, especially if legal drafters (the legislative) are not qualified people to do so. A responsive law, including shari'a bylaws, must be composed on the consideration of substance of law and justice and the impact that they may create for the society.