MK Case: A Naked Example of Law Without Soul

The gross ethical violation in the Constitutional Court regarding the decision on the age limit for prospective leaders is the most blatant example of legal practice that lacks axiology. Procedurally, the decision is considered valid. However, morally and ethically, it is fundamentally flawed. When the guardians of the constitution themselves are proven to have violated ethics without commensurate legal consequences, the public sees the law as nothing more than a joke.

The logic is simple: if those at the top of the legal hierarchy do not respect it, why demand that ordinary people obey unconditionally? Respect for the law is not something that can be forced, it must be earned through example and justice.

Time to Refill the Axiology Void

Our legal, political, and even religious education too often stops at teaching "rules", not "meaning". We are educated to memorize articles, not to think ethically. We are asked to obey, but not given the space to critically ask, "Is this law just?"

The solution we need is not just revising the law, but a revolution of values. Public legal literacy must be reintegrated with moral and ethical education. We need an education system that not only produces intelligent technocrats, but also people of integrity. We need public figures who are not only capable in rhetoric, but also have a sense of shame when they violate ethics.

Closing: Towards a Nation that Returns to Values

The Indonesian nation does not lack intellectual resources, we lack a moral compass. We do not lack legal rules, we are experiencing a justice deficit. Obedience will never grow from fear, it is born from respect.

As long as axiology does not return to being the spirit in every policy and law enforcement, disobedience will continue to be a normal sight. The question we must answer together is no longer "why doesn't society obey the law?", but "how can the law in this country be worthy of obedience again?"