<![CDATA[In 2024, widespread demonstrations across Indonesia signaled a profound crisis of public trust, driven by controversial policies regarding regional election laws, anti-corruption measures, and judicial independence. Using a normative legal research methodology, this paper examines these protests through the theoretical framework of Natural Law philosophy (Ius Naturale). The study analyzes how Natural Law views mass demonstrations as a criticism of unjust positive law and formulates how legislators ought to respond to public dissent. The findings reveal that positive law loses its moral validity and legal character when it deviates from universal principles of justice (Lex Injusta Non Est Lex). Consequently, civil protests are not merely transient political actions, but legitimate moral expressions grounded in collective human reason to defend inalienable natural rights and democratic sovereignty. For legislators, a Natural Law approach dictates that public demonstrations must not be met with defensive, purely procedural justifications. Instead, lawmakers are morally obligated to engage in open dialogue, evaluate policies against substantive justice, and boldly revise unjust legislation to restore harmony between formal legality, public morality, and the common good (Bonum Commune). Ultimately, this research emphasizes that to prevent institutional dysfunction, state policies must remain subordinate to higher ethical standards that uphold human dignity and true justice.]]>
