<![CDATA[Criminal judges' legal reasoning determines how legal norms are connected to proven facts and how judicial decisions are justified. In Indonesia, this reasoning cannot be separated from Pancasila as the philosophical foundation of the state. This study analyzes the structure of criminal judges' legal reasoning from the perspective of the first principle of Pancasila, Belief in the One and Only God, and examines how divine values can function within judicial consideration without replacing positive law. The study employs normative juridical research using statutory, conceptual, philosophical, and case approaches. Legal materials are analyzed qualitatively through legal interpretation and argumentation. The analysis identifies a sequential reasoning structure comprising the identification of legal facts and issues, selection and interpretation of relevant norms, connection of norms to facts, assessment of evidence, evaluation of criminal responsibility, formulation of legal arguments, and determination of the decision. The first principle operates as a moral-philosophical foundation that reinforces honesty, integrity, impartiality, responsibility, proportionality, judicial independence, and respect for human dignity. The study proposes a three-layer model of judicial reasoning consisting of legal, rational, and moral-philosophical layers. This model clarifies that Pancasila-based reasoning should strengthen, rather than substitute, legality, evidence, and accountable judicial argumentation.]]>
Copyrights © 2025
