The Framework of Law Impacts in Philosophy of Law and Justice: How the Certainty and Justice Understood?
Artha Debora Silalahi
Constitutional Court Republic Indonesia
arthadebora97@gmail.com
Abstract
This paper put an analysis on the
autonomy principle among law practitioners. The principle and values usually
use as the basic concept for justice understanding. The justice concept is adopted
to enforce the law in the fair trial process should not just understand to be
the main goal. There must be a wide broad approach segmented the social and
cultural frameworks with the conceptual analysis. This article is also concerned
for searching the reason relating to the paradigmatic practical calculations to
constitute the rule known as the reasonable rationale. The essential conditions
of what is practically managing the
guide with the rule application remarks just revealed. These remarks hopefully
can bring a clear explanation relating to the law practitioners pragmatic view
of speech act implications for debating the provisions. The standard case of
rules is formulated to protect and to fulfill the people's rights rather
rigidly fixing its range of application. There are powers of the people is
nevertheless limited decisions of legal validity concerning the substance of
the law. Dissatisfaction with the understanding of law practitioners for making
the reliable concept relating to the relationship between the law and powers of
people is underpinned by the ideal of popular sovereignty influence to be
understood. It is similar to the argument that consisted of the legal system for
the rule of law to be existed. There is a necessity to confirm and build some
mechanism of certain social practices among public officials and law
practitioners. There must be clear perspectives on how and why the government
and their policies absolutely cannot avoid the political biased and the
certainty of law urge to build the certain facts of law for the people to be
able to make law at all.
Keywords
legal certainty, the framework of law, justice, law impact, law philosophy
References
Alexy, R. (2002). A Theory of Constitutional Rights.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cerar, M. (2009). The
Relationship between Law and Politics. Annual Survey of International and
Comparative Law, 15(1).
Conklin, W. E. (2001). The
Invisible Origins of Legal Positivism: A Re-Reading of Tradition. Cambridge
University: Springer Science-Business Media Dordrecht.
Crotty M. (1998). The Foundations
of Social Research: Meaning and Perspectives in the Research Process.
London: Sage Publishing.
Gierke. (1934). Natural Law
and The Theory of Society. Barker’s tr.
Hart, HLA.
(1961). Concept of Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Harun, M. (2019). Philosophical
Study of Hans Kelsen’s Thoughts on Law and Satjipto Rahardjo’s Ideas on
Progressive Law. Walisongo Law Review (Walrev), 1(2), 195-220.
Hothersall, S. (2016). Epistemology and Social Work:
Integrating Theory, Research, and Practice through Philosophical Pragmatism, Social
Work and Social Sciences Review 18 (3).
Isra, S., & Faiz, P. M. (2021). Indonesian Constitutional Law:
Selected Articles on Challenges and Developments in Post-Constitutional Reform.
Depok: Rajawali Pers.
Janusiene, A. (2022). Judicial Authority through The
Experience of Crisis. Jindal Global Law Review 13(1), 69-86.
Jiménez, F. (2022). Legal
Principles, Law, and Tradition. Yale Journal of Law and The Humanities, 33(1),
59-91.
Kelsen, H. (1934). Introduction to The Problems of Legal Theory. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
Kessler, F. (1944). Natural Law,
Justice and Democracy: Some Reflections on Three Types of Thinking about Law
and Justice. University of Chicago Law School Journal Articles, 32,
31-61.
Leawoods, H. (2000). Gustav
Radbruch: An Extraordinary Legal Philosopher, Journal of Law and Policy,
2, 489-515.
Levi, R. D. (2005). The
Celluloid Courtroom: A History of Legal Cinema. Praeger.
Ludwig, D. & Weizkopf, D. A.
(2019). Ethnoontology: Ways of World-Building Across Cultures. Wiley Journal,
1-11.
Maris, C. W. & Jacobs, F. C.
L. M. (2011). Law, Order, and
Freedom: A Historical Introduction to Legal Philosophy. Netherlands:
Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
McAuliffe, P. (2021). Transitional Justice,
Instititutions and Temporality Towards a Dynamic Understanding, International Criminal Law Review, 21, 817-847.
Moon, K. & & Blackman, D.
(2014). A Guide to Understanding Social Science Research for Natural Scientist.
Conservation Biology, 20(5), 1167–1177.
Murphy, L. (2014). What Makes
Law: An Introduction to The Philosophy of Law. USA: Cambridge University Press.
Orme, J., & Briar-Lawson, K. (2010). Theory and Knowledge about Social Problems to enhance Policy Development. The Sage Handbook of Social Work Research, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications, 98-112.
Pratiwi, L. (2020). “Legal
Certainty Value in Pre-Accusation Institute to Optimize Justice for Justice
Seekers: Reconstruction of Pre-Accusation in the Criminal Procedure Code,” Open
Journal for Legal Studies 3 (1), 23-34.
Radbruch, G. (1991).
Five Minutes of Legal Philosophy. Joel Fienberg and Hyman Gross, eds.
Rawls, J. (1999). Theory of
Justice Revised Edition. (United States of America: Harvard University
Press.
Romero, O. (2020). Vox Populi
Non-Est Vox Dei, Res Publica-Journal of Undergraduate Research. 25,
30-37.
Schauer, F. (2005). The Social
Construction of the Concept of Law: A Reply to Julie Dickson. Oxford Journal
of Legal Studies, 25(3), 493–501.
Schubert, G. (2019). Human
Jurisprudence: Public Law as Political Science. Honolulu: The University
Press of Hawaii.
Thayer,
H.S. (1980): Meaning and Action: A Critical History of Pragmatism (2nd
ed). Minneapolis, USA: Hackett Publishing.
Tjahyadi. S. (1994). Keadilan,
Kepastian Hukum dan Praktek Peradilan Pidana: Praktek atas Kasus Pacah, Lingah,
dan Sumir. Jurnal Filsafat, 34-43.
Waldron, J. (2008). The Concept
and the Rule of Law, Georgia Law Review, 4,3–61.
Wibowo, M. (2013). Justice’s
Freedom of Constitutional Interpretation Method in The Constitutional Court. Mimbar
Hukum, 25(2), 284-299.
arthadebora97@gmail.com
Abstract
This paper put an analysis on the
autonomy principle among law practitioners. The principle and values usually
use as the basic concept for justice understanding. The justice concept is adopted
to enforce the law in the fair trial process should not just understand to be
the main goal. There must be a wide broad approach segmented the social and
cultural frameworks with the conceptual analysis. This article is also concerned
for searching the reason relating to the paradigmatic practical calculations to
constitute the rule known as the reasonable rationale. The essential conditions
of what is practically managing the
guide with the rule application remarks just revealed. These remarks hopefully
can bring a clear explanation relating to the law practitioners pragmatic view
of speech act implications for debating the provisions. The standard case of
rules is formulated to protect and to fulfill the people's rights rather
rigidly fixing its range of application. There are powers of the people is
nevertheless limited decisions of legal validity concerning the substance of
the law. Dissatisfaction with the understanding of law practitioners for making
the reliable concept relating to the relationship between the law and powers of
people is underpinned by the ideal of popular sovereignty influence to be
understood. It is similar to the argument that consisted of the legal system for
the rule of law to be existed. There is a necessity to confirm and build some
mechanism of certain social practices among public officials and law
practitioners. There must be clear perspectives on how and why the government
and their policies absolutely cannot avoid the political biased and the
certainty of law urge to build the certain facts of law for the people to be
able to make law at all.
Keywords
legal certainty, the framework of law, justice, law impact, law philosophyReferences
Alexy, R. (2002). A Theory of Constitutional Rights.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cerar, M. (2009). The
Relationship between Law and Politics. Annual Survey of International and
Comparative Law, 15(1).
Conklin, W. E. (2001). The
Invisible Origins of Legal Positivism: A Re-Reading of Tradition. Cambridge
University: Springer Science-Business Media Dordrecht.
Crotty M. (1998). The Foundations
of Social Research: Meaning and Perspectives in the Research Process.
London: Sage Publishing.
Gierke. (1934). Natural Law
and The Theory of Society. Barker’s tr.
Hart, HLA.
(1961). Concept of Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Harun, M. (2019). Philosophical
Study of Hans Kelsen’s Thoughts on Law and Satjipto Rahardjo’s Ideas on
Progressive Law. Walisongo Law Review (Walrev), 1(2), 195-220.
Hothersall, S. (2016). Epistemology and Social Work:
Integrating Theory, Research, and Practice through Philosophical Pragmatism, Social
Work and Social Sciences Review 18 (3).
Isra, S., & Faiz, P. M. (2021). Indonesian Constitutional Law:
Selected Articles on Challenges and Developments in Post-Constitutional Reform.
Depok: Rajawali Pers.
Janusiene, A. (2022). Judicial Authority through The
Experience of Crisis. Jindal Global Law Review 13(1), 69-86.
Jiménez, F. (2022). Legal
Principles, Law, and Tradition. Yale Journal of Law and The Humanities, 33(1),
59-91.
Kelsen, H. (1934). Introduction to The Problems of Legal Theory. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
Kessler, F. (1944). Natural Law,
Justice and Democracy: Some Reflections on Three Types of Thinking about Law
and Justice. University of Chicago Law School Journal Articles, 32,
31-61.
Leawoods, H. (2000). Gustav
Radbruch: An Extraordinary Legal Philosopher, Journal of Law and Policy,
2, 489-515.
Levi, R. D. (2005). The
Celluloid Courtroom: A History of Legal Cinema. Praeger.
Ludwig, D. & Weizkopf, D. A.
(2019). Ethnoontology: Ways of World-Building Across Cultures. Wiley Journal,
1-11.
Maris, C. W. & Jacobs, F. C.
L. M. (2011). Law, Order, and
Freedom: A Historical Introduction to Legal Philosophy. Netherlands:
Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
McAuliffe, P. (2021). Transitional Justice,
Instititutions and Temporality Towards a Dynamic Understanding, International Criminal Law Review, 21, 817-847.
Moon, K. & & Blackman, D.
(2014). A Guide to Understanding Social Science Research for Natural Scientist.
Conservation Biology, 20(5), 1167–1177.
Murphy, L. (2014). What Makes
Law: An Introduction to The Philosophy of Law. USA: Cambridge University Press.
Orme, J., & Briar-Lawson, K. (2010). Theory and Knowledge about Social Problems to enhance Policy Development. The Sage Handbook of Social Work Research, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications, 98-112.
Pratiwi, L. (2020). “Legal
Certainty Value in Pre-Accusation Institute to Optimize Justice for Justice
Seekers: Reconstruction of Pre-Accusation in the Criminal Procedure Code,” Open
Journal for Legal Studies 3 (1), 23-34.
Radbruch, G. (1991).
Five Minutes of Legal Philosophy. Joel Fienberg and Hyman Gross, eds.
Rawls, J. (1999). Theory of
Justice Revised Edition. (United States of America: Harvard University
Press.
Romero, O. (2020). Vox Populi
Non-Est Vox Dei, Res Publica-Journal of Undergraduate Research. 25,
30-37.
Schauer, F. (2005). The Social
Construction of the Concept of Law: A Reply to Julie Dickson. Oxford Journal
of Legal Studies, 25(3), 493–501.
Schubert, G. (2019). Human
Jurisprudence: Public Law as Political Science. Honolulu: The University
Press of Hawaii.
Thayer,
H.S. (1980): Meaning and Action: A Critical History of Pragmatism (2nd
ed). Minneapolis, USA: Hackett Publishing.
Tjahyadi. S. (1994). Keadilan,
Kepastian Hukum dan Praktek Peradilan Pidana: Praktek atas Kasus Pacah, Lingah,
dan Sumir. Jurnal Filsafat, 34-43.
Waldron, J. (2008). The Concept
and the Rule of Law, Georgia Law Review, 4,3–61.
Wibowo, M. (2013). Justice’s
Freedom of Constitutional Interpretation Method in The Constitutional Court. Mimbar
Hukum, 25(2), 284-299.
