<![CDATA[Civil procedural law in Indonesia generally adopts the concept of formal truth, which is based on the facts and evidence presented by the parties in court. The application of this concept is related to the passive judge principle, which limits the judge's role in assessing the parties' arguments and evidence in order to maintain judicial neutrality and procedural certainty. However, the dominance of formal truth may create a gap between procedural and substantive justice due to economic disparities, unequal access to legal assistance, differences in access to information, and disparities in the parties' ability to present evidence. This study aims to analyze the weaknesses of the dominance of formal truth and formulate a limited material truth model in civil procedural law. This normative legal research employs statutory, conceptual, case, and philosophical approaches. The results show that formal truth has limitations in revealing the actual truth because it depends on the parties' ability to prove their claims. The full application of material truth may also potentially undermine judicial impartiality. Therefore, a limited material truth model is needed through objective parameters, including inequality between the parties, indications of evidence manipulation or abuse of legal process, and the need to realize substantive justice. This model is expected to balance legal certainty, procedural justice, and substantive justice.]]>
