Research reveals an ideal framework for judicial law-finding in Indonesia, emphasizing substantive justice and accountability.
The enactment of Law Number 1 of 2023 marks a fundamental paradigm shift in the Indonesian criminal justice system, prioritizing substantive justice over formal legal certainty. This shift radically transforms the role of a Judge from a mere mouthpiece of the law (bouche de la loi) to an active law-finder (rechtsvinder). However, the practice of law-finding in the field remains largely ad hoc and intuitive, creating a risk of inconsistency. Addressing this urgency, this research aims to formulate a systematic and accountable ideal concept of judicial law-finding to serve as an operational guide for Judges. Using a normative juridical method that integrates a statute approach, a conceptual approach, and a case approach to key court decisions, this study conducts a methodological reconstruction of the practice of judicial discretion. The primary finding is the formulation of a “judicial compass” built upon five mutually reinforcing fundamental principles: (1) proportionality, (2) transparency and accountability, (3) judicial consistency, (4) social responsiveness, and (5) dynamic equilibrium. These five principles collectively transform the law-finding process into a structured and rational approach. Thus, this ideal concept contributes both theoretically and practically by offering a coherent framework for Judges to execute the mandate of Law Number 1 of 2023, enabling them to harmonize legal values justly and measurably in every decision.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Irwan et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: