<![CDATA[This research is motivated by the continued dominance of legal research at the doctoral level, which is oriented towards a normative-descriptive approach and thus fails to produce scientific contributions such as legal reconstruction or the development of new legal theories. This condition causes many dissertations to focus only on the inventory and interpretation of legal norms without offering conceptual updates that have novelty value. This research aims to analyze the concept and nature of legal reconstruction, examine appropriate methods in developing new legal theories, and formulate a systematic methodological model of legal reconstruction to produce theoretical contributions to doctoral research in legal science. The research employs a normative legal research method, using a statutory and conceptual approach. The legal materials, comprising primary, secondary, and tertiary sources, are collected through literature review and examined qualitatively using argumentative and deductive analytical methods grounded in legal reasoning. The results of the study indicate that legal reconstruction is a scientific process that is not only oriented towards changing norms, but also rebuilding concepts, paradigms, and legal theories based on a critical analysis of the weaknesses of the existing legal system. The development of a new legal theory requires systematic steps, including identification of legal issues, analysis of norms and theories, critical evaluation, conceptual synthesis, theory formulation, and scientific validation. This research proposes a methodological model for legal reconstruction that integrates normative, conceptual, philosophical, comparative, and legal reasoning approaches as a scientific framework for generating novelty and theoretical contributions. This model is expected to serve as a guideline for doctoral research, resulting in innovative, high-quality dissertations that contribute to the development of legal science and the national legal system.]]>
