Does the Judiciary Support Legal Certainty? An Indonesian Perspective

Zaka Firma  Aditya

doi:10.6000/2817-2302.2023.02.03

Authors

Zaka Firma Aditya Center for Research and Case Analysis, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.6000/2817-2302.2023.02.03

Keywords:

Judicial Institution, justice, Legal Certainty, Judge

Abstract

Many legal thinkers have tried to interpret what and how the principle of legal certainty enforced. In both civil and common law traditions, legal certainty is considered a value and the basis for the legality of public authorities' legislative and administrative actions. The meaning of these two views, both Civil law and Common law, is that legal certainty is the embodiment of the principle of legal legality or in other words, legal certainty related to law enforcement itself. Interestingly, legal certainty begins with the legal uncertainty created by the institutions that form it. The judge's role in interpreting, translating and finding the law is crucial so that there is no legal vacuum due to the malfunction of the rule of law. This paper will discuss how the Indonesian judiciary supports legal certainty. The research method used is juridical normative with conceptual, and case approaches. The results of this study indicate that the Indonesian judiciary supports legal certainty through legal interpretation and legal findings made by judges. This legal interpretation and legal findings' primary purpose is to fill the legal gap left by laws that are multiple interpretations and ambiguous.

References

D'amato A. Legal Uncertainty. California Law Review 1983; 7: 1-55. https://doi.org/10.2307/3480139

Kammerhofer J. Uncertainty In International Law: A Kelsenian Perspectivet, New York: Routledge, 2011. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203847213

Aditya ZF. Judicial Consistency dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Penodaan Agama. Jurnal Konstitusi 2020; 17(1): 80-103. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1714

Rauta U, et al., Legitimasi Praktek Overulling di Mahkamah Konstitusi, Hasil Penelitian Kompetitif Kerjasama Mahkamah Konstitusi dengan Fakultas Hukum Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana, 2018.

Marzuki PM. Penelitian Hukum, Jakarta: Kencana Media Group, 2014.

Neihaus PH. Legal Certainty Versus Equity In The Conflict Of Laws. Law and Contemporary Problems 1963; 28: 795-807. https://doi.org/10.2307/1190565

van Apeldoorn, Pengantar Ilmu Hukum (cetakan ke-24), Jakarta: Pradyana Paramita, 1990.

Lanneau R. What Is Legal Certainty? A Theorithical Essay 2013; pp. 1-17. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2361630

Fuller L. The Morality of Law, New Happen: Yale University Press 1964.

Habermas J. Between Facts And Norms – Contributions To A Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, Cambridge: MIT Press 1996. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1564.001.0001

Dworkin R. Law’s Empire, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986.

Paunio E. Beyond Predictability: Reflections on Legal Certainty And The Discourse Theory Of Law In The EU Legal Order. German Law Journal 2009; 10(11): 1469-1493. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200018332

Paunio E. Legal Certainty in Multilingual EU Law: Language, Discourse and Reasoning At The European Court of Justice, Fulham-England: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 1988.

Frank J. Law and the Modern Mind, London: Routledge, 2009.

Merryman JH. The Civil Law Tradition : An Introduction to The Legal System of Europe and Latin America, Second Edition, Standford-Carolina: Stanford University Press, 1985.

de Cruz P. Comparative Law in a changing World, London: Cavendish Publishing, 1999.

Raharjo S, Ilmu H. Bandung: PT. Citra Aditya Bakti, 2014.

Asshiddiqie J. Konstitusi dan Konstitusionalisme di Indonesia, Jakarta: Sekretariat Jenderal dan Kepaniteraan MK, 2006.

Aditya ZF. Penerapan Modal Sosial dalam Praktek Peradilan yang Berbasis Kepekaan Sosial. Legality: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 2018; 25(2): 200-219. https://doi.org/10.22219/jihl.v25i2.6002

Sutiyoso B. Implementasi Gugatan Legal Standing Dan Class Action Dalam Praktik Peradilan di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum 2004; 26(11): 63-78. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol11.iss26.art5

Fakrullah ZA. Membangun Citra Hukum Melalui Putusan Hakim Yang Berkualitas. Jurnal Keadilan 2001; 1(3).

Aditya ZF. Asas Retroaktif Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Teori dan Praktik, Jakarta: Rajawali Press: 2020.

Zietlow RE. The Judicial Restraint of the Warren Court and Why it Matters. Presented Essay on Meeting of the law and Society Association, Toledo, 2006. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.960144

Dramanda W. Menggagas Penerapan Judicial Restraint Di Mahkamah Konstitusi. Jurnal Konstitusi 2014; 11(4): 617-631. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1141

Martitah M. Konstitusi: dari Negative Legislature ke Positive Legislature? Jakarta, Konstitusi Press, 2013.

Maxeiner JR. Some Realism About Legal Certainty in The Globalization. J Int’l L 2008; 27: 28-46.

Maxeiner JR. Legal Certainty: A European Alternative to American Legal Indeterminacy? Tulane Journal of International & Comparative Law 2007; 15(2): 541-607. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1150522.

Ali A, Hukum MT. (suatu kajian filosofis dan sosiologis), Jakarta: Chandra Pratama. 1996.