SAME RULE, DIFFERENT FATES: SCHOOL ZONING, UNEQUAL SUPPLY, AND THE CASE FOR SUBSTANTIVE EDUCATIONAL JUSTICE IN INDONESIA

Muhammad Jibran Arief (University of Bengkulu)
Gian Rakha Anggara (University of Bengkulu)
Eldi Korniawan (University of Bengkulu)
M. Wendie Fratama (University of Bengkulu)
Emelia Kontesa (University of Bengkulu)

Sophist Jurnal Sosial Politik Kajian Islam dan Tafsir
Vol. 8 No. 3 (2026): Digital Epistemology, Maqasid Ethics, Socio-Legal Reform, and Civilizational Re

Indonesia's school zoning policy assigns public school seats by residence, and the 2025 reform renamed it the domicile track without changing that logic. This article asks why a formally equal rule has not produced educational justice where school supply is uneven, and builds a test that can tell. Using doctrinal legal research and a stylised simulation, it reads the admission rule through Aristotle's proportionality, Rawls's difference principle with Sen's capability approach, and Radbruch's balance of justice, purposiveness and legal certainty. The documented record shows public seats covering only about 47 per cent of expected junior secondary applicants in Jakarta, 128 sub-districts in West Java with no public senior secondary school, manipulated residence documents in Makassar, and unfilled public seats in Bengkulu. The simulation shows one identical rule producing placement rates of 99, 80 and 35 per cent across three districts, converging at 79 per cent once seats are redistributed. The article concludes that a residence-based admission rule is substantively just only where nearby seats are adequate, published and monitored, with a duty to correct shortfalls resting on the authority that drew the zone.