Legal Literacy - This article will discuss the antinomy between legal certainty and legal justice. If there is a conflict between these two legal objectives, which should be prioritized? Justice or certainty?

A German legal expert and legal philosopher, Gustav Radbruch, stated that the purpose of law is to fulfill justice, certainty, and expediency in social life. However, in the factual conditions of the implementation of law, these three legal objectives often reach a deadlock like two different sides of a coin. On the one hand, law with the aim of certainty can deviate from justice, but on the other hand, the justice that is realized does not fulfill certainty.

A factual example of the bifurcation of these two objectives is the case of Nenek Asyani who was dragged to the District Court of Situbondo, East Java, on charges of stealing teak wood on Perhutani land in Jatibanteng Village. In fact, the teak wood was cut from Asyani's land which had been sold in 2010.

In this case, the coin between legal certainty and legal justice. On the one hand, it is unfair for someone who only took teak wood planks, especially claiming it was on their own land, to be dragged to court and punished, even though she was later sentenced to probation. On the other hand, this must be the case if we want legal certainty, no matter how small or how many reasons we make to obtain justice, legal certainty through the courts in accordance with applicable laws and regulations will definitely be prioritized.