<![CDATA[This paper examines how the implementation of liability for gross human rights violators in transitional justice contexts often involves "rule-bending." It focuses on the tension between legal norms and the interests of authorities, particularly in cases of enforced disappearances, concerning command responsibility. Taking into account the Indonesian case and comparing it to the implementation of the liability prosecution process in various countries, this research employed a socio-legal method and crime semiotics to deconstruct the law for analysis purposes. The research employed the rule of law theory by Lon Fuller as the grand theory, progressive law theory by Satjipto Rahardjo as the middle theory, and the liability theory of gross human rights violations, particularly in relation to Law No. 26 of 2000 as applied theory. The research results indicate that the rule-bending of processing the liability of gross human rights violators, particularly in the case of enforced disappearances, is associated with negative rule-bending, which involves a culture of autocratic legalism. The progressive law and transitional justice provide a solution to what this research indicates, which is the novelty of the research, as a transformative law model that covers the system of law and the individuals, particularly law enforcement officers, to be progressive: having compassion, empathy, and daring to prosecute the liability of past gross human rights violators.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
