Legal Literacy - This article discusses the state in the portrait of a legal policy. A popular theory as an introduction that is certainly well known in all circles of discourse entitled legal products and their interpretation. Namely, Lawrence M Friedman in ideally states that the effectiveness and success of law enforcement depends on three elements of the legal system, namely the structure of law, the substance of law, and the culture of law.
By: Ch Idzan Falaqi Harmer (Postgraduate Student, Faculty of Law, Gadjah Mada University)
A popular theory as an introduction that is certainly well known in all circles of discourse entitled legal products and their interpretation. Namely, Lawrence M Friedman in its ideal context states that the effectiveness and success of law enforcement depends on three elements of the legal system, namely the structure of law, the substance of law, and the culture of law.
The majority agrees that the theory above is used as a reference and basis for legal interpretation, the creation of legal products, and their implementation as an inseparable unit. In the content of basic norms or what is referred to as the constitution (the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia), which is used as the highest legal norm in the hierarchy of laws and regulations, it often reaps various interpretations. Thus, it is not uncommon for mandates regarding the implementation of norms contained in constitutional material to receive attention, which can then be seen with the emergence of various discourses in various academic, social and community circles or groups.
Ironically, the formation of laws and regulations that are below it often collides with the material and content of the constitution which is legitimized as the highest legal norm. This is evidenced by the emergence of various tests of these laws and regulations against the 1945 Constitution at the Constitutional Court (MK).
How Does the Constitution Exist as a Basic Norm?
Everyone agrees that the constitution, which contains basic legal norms, regulates interests regarding basic rights, and to protect all the interests of the nation and all citizens, of course. This is in line with the theory put forward by Hans Kelsen through his stufenbau theory. He revealed that the legal system is a ladder system with tiered rules, where the lowest legal norm must adhere to the higher legal norm, and the higher legal norm (such as the constitution) must adhere to the most basic norm (grundnorm). He said, regarding grundnorm is
a statement from which all other duty statements ultimately get their validity from.
In subsequent interpretations and enrichments, it is interpreted that the formation of laws and regulations subordinate to the 1945 Constitution as the highest legal norm should not undermine the values and basic norms that serve as benchmarks or foundations for the highest source of law of a nation and state.
Isn't it clear that the purpose of forming laws and regulations is solely for the sake of benefit and to guarantee the basic rights of citizens? Good intentions and good faith, hopefully the formation or political product of law always reflects the implementation of Law Number 12 of 2011 as amended into Law Number 15 of 2019 concerning the Formation of Laws and Regulations, which is carried out properly by embodying the values and provisions contained therein.
The Ideals of Legal Politics?
As a product is created, it cannot be separated from the mandate of its formation and the purpose for which it was formed. In line with the purpose of law, which generally aims to realize "justice, expediency, and legal certainty." Like a human organ, if drawn into the enrichment of a philosophy of science.
Perhaps the above is an inseparable part of each other. That is, a good legal product is a legal product that guarantees the principles and objectives of law in a complete and comprehensive manner, so it is not justified to violate the essence, values, and provisions of the purpose of law. When one of the objectives of the law is not fulfilled, then the legal product of the laws and regulations can be assessed as a legally flawed product.
As the expression of a French philosopher, Montesquieu, he expressed that
there is no tyranny perpetrated under the protection of law and in the name of justice.
Thus, through interpretation in that expression, the tendency of power is not justified and can even be said to be tyrannical if the exercise of that power is sheltered under the umbrella of law.
Thus, there is no truth that can be accepted in the reasons that become narratives and justifying arguments to refute inevitability and perpetuate power that tends not to be guided by and sided with the people as the owners of the highest sovereignty. Moreover, if the state has ideals democracy, but in practice what happens instead seems to "straddle" the foundation of democracy itself. Ironic.
Read Also: What is the Rule of Law?
Doesn't the State Exist to Guarantee People's Sovereignty?
Reliable and skilled. Actually, the state institutionally is undoubtedly capable of absorbing all schools of thought and legal streams, as well as legal theories as guidelines that have developed from the past to the present, then interpreting things that are suitable to these values and adopting them into values and norms that become a collective understanding by the community, and pouring them into the form of carrying out duties as guarantors of the basic rights of a nation and citizens.
The presence of state institutions is as the embodiment of all their expertise, as holders of executive, legislative, and judicial power. In the form of good faith, it is highly unlikely that those who implement these values and norms would fulfill interests that are solely for themselves personally, and not for the purpose of the common good. However, on the other hand, perhaps such a narrative is just one form or example of a citizen who tends to adhere to a naive behavioral benchmark.
In a noble hope, it is appropriate for the state as the guarantor and protector of all the people's interests, as stated in the state's objectives in the point and main paragraph 4 of the 1945 Constitution, namely:
to protect all Indonesian people and the entire Indonesian territory; to promote public welfare; to educate the nation's life; and to participate in maintaining world order based on independence, eternal peace and social justice.
Carrying out these tasks and having the collective belief that the state exists thanks to the du contract social, then this is essentially realized that by nature the laws and regulations intended for civilized humans to create a civilized nation, essentially place power in the hands of the people. And of course, all interests in the formation of legislation are solely for the interests of the people. By reflecting the purpose of law which has elements of justice, benefit, and legal certainty. And, by always placing the purity of the owner of sovereignty in the hands of the people themselves.
Wallahu'alam bish-shawab.
*This article represents the opinions author's personal views and does not represent the views of the editors Legal Literacy Indonesia.
Comments (0)
Write a comment