Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Philosophy of Justice In The Shadow of Plurality A Feminist Interpretation of Legal Inequality Towards Women Fitria Wildasari; Sidik Sunaryo
YURISDIKSI : Jurnal Wacana Hukum dan Sains Vol. 21 No. 1 (2025): June
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Merdeka University Surabaya, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55173/yurisdiksi.v21i1.294

Abstract

This article explores the critical relationship between justice, feminist jurisprudence, and legal pluralism in the context of Indonesia's multilayered legal system. While classical legal philosophy particularly Aristotelian thought has long conceptualized justice in terms of distributive and corrective fairness, such frameworks often fall short in addressing systemic gender inequality. In societies marked by legal pluralism, including Indonesia, women remain structurally marginalized within state law, customary law, and religious law. This study examines how feminist jurisprudence provides an alternative lens for reinterpreting justice by centering the lived experiences of women and exposing patriarchal power structures embedded in legal institutions. Feminist jurisprudence challenges the presumed neutrality of law, revealing its complications in reinforcing male dominance and silencing women's voices. In the plural legal landscape of Indonesia, patriarchal norms are often preserved through the state's accommodation of discriminatory practices under the guidance of respecting cultural traditions or religious autonomy. Customary inheritance laws, the positioning of women in marriage, and religious family law disproportionately disadvantage women. Despite formal legal reforms such as the enactment of the Domestic Violence Law and the Sexual Violence Law, implementation remains hindered by institutional gender bias and cultural resistance. By integrating feminist legal theory into the discourse on justice, this paper advocates a shift from formal equality to substantive, transformative justice. Legal pluralism, rather than being a neutral space of cultural expression, must be critically interrogated to prevent the legitimization of systemic gender oppression. Ultimately, the article argues that feminist jurisprudence offers both a theoretical and practical pathway for reconstructing inclusive legal systems that uphold the rights and dignity of women in pluralistic societies.  
The Principle of Fault In Absolute Responsibility For Environmental Crimes (Study of Decision Number 107/PDT.G/Lh/2019/PN JMB) Fitria Wildasari; Tongat
YURISDIKSI : Jurnal Wacana Hukum dan Sains Vol. 21 No. 3 (2025): December In progress
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Merdeka University Surabaya, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55173/yurisdiksi.v21i3.317

Abstract

The environment holds an important position in the Indonesian legal system as stipulated in Article 28H paragraph (1) and Article 33 paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, which guarantees the right to a good and healthy environment. However, the increasing number of corporate activities that cause environmental pollution and damage raises fundamental issues related to criminal liability. Classical criminal law adheres to the principle of fault (mens rea), namely that a person can only be punished if they have intent (dolus) or negligence (culpa). The application of this principle becomes problematic when the perpetrator is a corporation that does not have an inner will like humans. To address this, Law Number 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management introduced the principle of strict liability, which allows for criminal punishment without proving the element of fault if environmental pollution or damage is proven to have occurred. This study analyzes the application of the principle of fault and the principle of strict liability in the Jambi District Court Decision Number 107/Pdt.G/LH/2019/PN Jmb using a juridical-normative method with a statutory and case approach. The study's findings indicate that the application of strict liability in the decision reflects a paradigm shift in environmental criminal law from a fault-based model to a system of accountability oriented toward ecological protection. While this principle strengthens the victim's position and the effectiveness of environmental law, it has also generated debate because it potentially undermines the principle of geen straf zonder schuld (no crime without fault).