The basic law paradigm in the sociological spotlight: Between ideality and social reality
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21831/edulaw.v1i2.1497Keywords:
Keywords: legal paradigm; sociology of law; progressive law; social justice; societal reality; law reformAbstract
This research aims to understand how law works in people's lives by looking at it from a sociological perspective. So far, the law is often regarded as a rule that cannot be contested because it is written in the law. But in reality, the law does not always work as expected. Many cases of injustice occur, especially against weak groups. For this reason, a sociological approach is needed so that the law can be more humane and in accordance with the real conditions in society. This research was conducted with a qualitative method through literature study, namely reading and analyzing relevant books and scientific writings, including the thoughts of progressive legal experts. The results of this research show that the law should not only focus on rules, but should also pay attention to the values of social justice and the culture of the community. One approach that supports this is progressive law, which is law that dares to make breakthroughs for the common good. This research concludes that law in Indonesia needs to be built in a way that is more sensitive to social reality, so that it can truly bring justice, not just certainty. By combining normative and sociological legal approaches, the law will be more easily accepted and implemented by the community.
Downloads
References
Adang, Y. A. (2008). Pengantar Sosiologi Hukum. Jakarta: Grasindo.
Alexy, R. (2020). Basic Rights and Democracy in Jürgen Habermas’s Procedural Paradigm of the Law *. In H. Baxter (Ed.), Habermas and Law (1st ed., pp. 59–70). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003074977-5
Aulia, M. Z., Hantoro, B. F., Sanjaya, W., & Ali, M. (2023). The Use of Progressive Law Phrase in Constitutional Court Decisions: Context, Meaning, and Implication: Penggunaan Frasa Hukum Progresif dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi: Konteks, Makna, dan Implikasi. Jurnal Konstitusi, 20(3), 423–450. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk2034
Bea, M. D., & Taylor Poppe, E. S. (2021). Marginalized legal categories: Social inequality, family structure, and the laws of intestacy. Law & Society Review, 55(2), 252–272. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12553
Davis, D. (2010). Transformation: The Constitutional Promise and Reality. South African Journal on Human Rights, 26(1), 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/19962126.2010.11864977
Dewantara, A. M., & Larasati, D. K. (2022). Implementation of Progressive Law in Enforcement of Environmental Law in Indonesia: The Current Problems and Future Challenges. Indonesian Journal of Environmental Law and Sustainable Development, 1(2), 237–264. https://doi.org/10.15294/ijel.v1i2.58044
Di Carlo, L. (2020). Institute, Unterprinzipien und Normen: Eine Neuinterpretation der institutionellen Theorie des Rechts. A new Interpretation of the Institutional Theory of Law. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, 106(3), 427–443. https://doi.org/10.25162/arsp-2020-0020
Fikriawan, S., Anwar, S., & Ardiansyah, M. (2021). The Paradigm of Progressive Judge’s Decision and Its Contribution to Islamic Legal Reform in Indonesia. Al-Manahij: Jurnal Kajian Hukum Islam, 15(2), 249–262. https://doi.org/10.24090/mnh.v15i2.4730
Hirsch, M. (2013). Investment tribunals and human rights treaties: A sociological perspective. In F. Baetens (Ed.), Investment Law within International Law (1st ed., pp. 85–105). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139855921.008
Hunt, J. S. (2024). Diversity and Bias in Legal Decision-Making: Broadening Frameworks and Addressing Overlooked Issues. In M. K. Miller, L. A. Yelderman, M. T. Huss, & J. A. Cantone (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Psychology and Legal Decision-Making (1st ed., pp. 32–48). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009119375.003
Institute of State and Law, Russian Academy of Sciences, & Varlamova, N. V. (2022). Understanding of Constitutionality in Legal Philosophical Discourse: Imaginary and Genuine Alternatives. Voprosy Filosofii, 25–36. https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2022-4-25-36
Kaufman, W. R. P. (2023). Normative Legal Positivism. In W. R. P. Kaufman, Beyond Legal Positivism (Vol. 143, pp. 121–148). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-43868-4_5
Lisma, L. (2019). Progressive Law Functions In Realizing Justice In Indonesia. Syariah: Jurnal Hukum Dan Pemikiran, 19(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.18592/sy.v19i1.2543
Meldrum, R. C., Stemen, D., & Kutateladze, B. L. (2021). Progressive and Traditional Orientations to Prosecution: An Empirical Assessment in Four Prosecutorial Offices. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 48(3), 354–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820956672
Partogi Sihombing, J. S., Saraswati, R., Yunanto, Y., & Turymshayeva, A. (2024). The Regulation of Legal Protection for Poor Communities Toward Justice in Indonesia and the Netherlands. Journal of Human Rights, Culture and Legal System, 4(2), 331–353. https://doi.org/10.53955/jhcls.v4i2.274
Raharjo, S. (2006). Membedah Hukum Progresif. Semarang: Kompas.
Ramadhan, S., & Muslimin, Jm. (2022). Indonesian Religious Court Decisions on Child Custody Cases: Between Positivism and Progressive Legal Thought. JURIS (Jurnal Ilmiah Syariah), 21(1), 89. https://doi.org/10.31958/juris.v21i1.5723
Revina, S. N., Sidorova, A. V., Zakharov, A. L., Tselniker, G. F., & Kurushin, S. A. (2017). Dissemination Issues of Legal Information: The Past and the Present. In E. G. Popkova (Ed.), Russia and the European Union (pp. 161–167). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55257-6_22
Sudarmanto, K., Arifin, Z., Kusudarmanto, A. M. R. A., & Jain, V. (2025). Electoral Law Reform from the Perspective of Responsive Justice: A Comparison of Indonesia, India, and Australia. Jambe Law Journal, 8(1), 315–346. https://doi.org/10.22437/home.v8i1.513
Theil, S. (2025). Carefully Tailored: Doctrinal Methods and Empirical Contributions. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 45(4), 1047–1075. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqaf029
Vandzhurak, R., Kushakova-Kostytska, N., Balynska, O., Pankevych, O., & Nastasiak, I. (2025). Socio-legal phenomenon of judicial reasoning in the context of the implementation of a functional state. Social and Legal Studios, 108–117. https://doi.org/10.32518/sals2.2025.108
Wardana, D. J., Sukardi, S., & Salman, R. (2023). Public Participation in the Law-Making Process in Indonesia. Jurnal Media Hukum, 30(1), 66–77. https://doi.org/10.18196/jmh.v30i1.14813
Wijayanti, S. N., ALW, L. T., Lailam, T., & Iswandi, K. (2025). Progressive Legal Approaches of the Constitutional Justice Reasoning on Judicial Review Cases: Challenges or Opportunities?. LAW REFORM, 21(2), 219-240. https://doi.org/10.14710/lr.v21i2.66334.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Dinda Chamelia Sari
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
