Jamaludin Jamaludin
Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Nahdlatul Ulama Nusa Tenggara Barat

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Rekonstruksi Historis Relasi Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia di Indonesia: Analisis Komparatif Perspektif Barat dan Islam Jamaludin Jamaludin; Tata Eliestiana Dyah A; Andi Mulyan
Human Rights et Justicia Vol. 1 No. 2 (2026): Human Rights et Justicia
Publisher : Yayasan Abdurrauf Cendekia Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.70742/hrj.v1i2.586

Abstract

Human rights are fundamental rights inherent in every individual and constitute a core element of the rule of law. However, despite their formal recognition within the Indonesian legal system, persistent human rights violations continue to occur, indicating a gap between legal norms and their practical enforcement. In addition, existing studies on human rights in Indonesia tend to be partial, as they often examine either Western legal perspectives or Islamic perspectives separately, without integrating them within a comprehensive historical framework. This study aims to reconstruct the historical relationship between law and human rights in Indonesia through a comparative analysis of Western and Islamic perspectives. This research employs normative legal methods using statutory, conceptual, and historical approaches. The findings reveal that the development of human rights in Indonesia is shaped by the interaction between Western legal traditions rooted in natural law theory and Islamic traditions based on divine values. Although these perspectives differ in their philosophical foundations, they converge in emphasizing human dignity as a fundamental value. This study contributes by offering an integrative framework that bridges these two traditions in understanding the relationship between law and human rights in Indonesia, and highlights the importance of aligning legal norms, moral values, and law enforcement practices in achieving a substantive rule of law. [Hak asasi manusia merupakan hak-hak mendasar yang melekat pada setiap individu dan merupakan unsur inti dari supremasi hukum. Namun, meskipun telah diakui secara formal dalam sistem hukum Indonesia, pelanggaran hak asasi manusia terus terjadi yang menunjukkan adanya kesenjangan antara norma-norma hukum dan penegakannya dalam praktik. Selain itu, berbagai studi yang ada mengenai hak asasi manusia di Indonesia cenderung bersifat parsial, karena hanya mengkaji perspektif hukum Barat atau perspektif Islam secara terpisah, tanpa mengintegrasikannya dalam kerangka sejarah yang komprehensif. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk merekonstruksi hubungan historis antara hukum dan hak asasi manusia di Indonesia melalui analisis komparatif antara perspektif Barat dan Islam. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode hukum normatif dengan pendekatan yuridis, konseptual, dan historis. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa perkembangan hak asasi manusia di Indonesia dipengaruhi oleh hubungan antara tradisi hukum Barat yang berakar pada teori hukum alam dan tradisi Islam yang didasarkan pada nilai-nilai ilahi. Meskipun kedua perspektif ini memiliki landasan filosofis yang berbeda, keduanya memiliki kesamaan dalam menekankan martabat manusia sebagai nilai fundamental. Studi ini memberikan kontribusi dengan menawarkan kerangka integratif yang menjembatani kedua tradisi tersebut dalam memahami hubungan antara hukum dan hak asasi manusia di Indonesia, serta menegaskan pentingnya menyelaraskan norma-norma hukum, nilai-nilai moral, dan praktik penegakan hukum dalam mewujudkan supremasi hukum yang substantif.]
Komentar Netizen Menjadi Hakim: Krisis Objektivitas Penegakan Hukum Pidana Akibat Dominasi Opini Publik Jamaludin Jamaludin; Tata Eliestiana Dyah A
RETORIKA: Journal of Law, Social, and Humanities Vol. 4 No. 2 (2026): Retorika: Journal of Law, Social, and Humanities
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Nahdlatul Ulama Nusa Tenggara Barat

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.69503/retorika.v4i2.1547

Abstract

Abstract The development of information technology and social media has driven the dominance of digital public opinion in criminal law enforcement in Indonesia, including the practice of trial by netizens, which has the potential to shift the objectivity, independence, and rationality of the justice system. This study aims to analyze the extent to which the dominance of public opinion shifts the objectivity of criminal law enforcement and how the phenomenon of trial by netizens triggers a crisis of objectivity in the criminal justice system. This study uses a normative legal research method with a statutory approach, a case approach, and a conceptual approach. The types and sources of legal materials are primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The legal material collection technique is carried out through literature studies and analyzed qualitatively using legal reasoning and interpretation methods. The research results show that the dominance of public opinion in mass and social media has the potential to shift the objectivity of criminal law enforcement, because massive public pressure encourages law enforcement to be more responsive to social demands than to the principles of legality, presumption of innocence, and legal proof, thus risking weakening due process, judicial independence, and the objectives of the New Criminal Code for sentencing, which emphasize justice and human dignity. The phenomenon of trial by netizens shows that the digital space has transformed into an arena for social judgment that precedes the formal judicial process. Public opinion that goes viral on social media has the potential to suppress the objectivity of law enforcement, influence the decisions of law enforcement officers, and reduce the independence of judges. This condition also risks weakening the principles of due process of law and the protection of human rights, thus presenting a crisis of objectivity in the criminal justice system. Keywords: Netizen Comments; Judges; Objectivity Crisis; Criminal Law Enforcement; Public Opinion Dominance