cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Achmad Fawaid
Contact Email
achmad_fawaid.linguistik@upnjatim.ac.id
Phone
+6282318007953
Journal Mail Official
khatulistiwanarasi@gmail.com
Editorial Address
Dusun Krajan, RT 015 / RW 007 Desa Karanganyar, Kecamatan Paiton, Kabupaten Probolinggo, Provinsi Jawa Timur, Kodepos 67291
Location
Kab. probolinggo,
Jawa timur
INDONESIA
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse
Published by CV Narasi Khatulistiwa Indonesia
ISSN : -     EISSN : 31634729     DOI : -
Core Subject :
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse is a double blind peer-reviewed scholarly journal that publishes original research articles and critical studies at the intersection of linguistics, law, and legal discourse. This journal is published quarterly as a platform for the dissemination of theoretical, empirical, and interdisciplinary findings that examine how language operates within legal systems, institutions, and practices. It addresses a broad range of topics, including but not limited to legal discourse analysis, forensic linguistics, courtroom interaction, legislative and policy language, legal pragmatics, language and power in law, judicial reasoning, legal translation and interpreting, and language-centered approaches to law and justice in social and institutional contexts.
Arjuna Subject : -
Articles 12 Documents
 1   2 
Forensic linguistic evidence in Indonesian courtrooms: a study of language use in criminal verdicts Wahyu Beny Mukti Setiyawan
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): Language, power, and legal communication in Indonesia
Publisher : CV Narasi Khatulistiwa Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.67490/ijll.v1i1.524

Abstract

Background: Language in Indonesian criminal verdicts functions not only as a medium of legal reasoning but also as a mechanism for constructing institutional authority and shaping public perceptions of justice. Objective: The aim of this study is to analyze how language in verdict texts constructs legal facts, interprets testimonies, and reproduces ideological frameworks in Indonesian courtrooms. Method: This research employs a qualitative design using forensic discourse analysis, speech act theory, and critical linguistic analysis on a purposive corpus of thirty verdicts sampled from the Supreme Court directory between 2020 and 2025. Results: The results reveal three key findings: first, passive voice and nominalizations dominate narrative construction, obscuring agency while reinforcing judicial neutrality; second, testimonies are strategically represented through denials, assertions, and commissives, yet frequently reframed in indirect speech that diminishes defendants’ agency; third, ideological expressions such as legitimizing formulae, stigmatizing labels, and religious appeals permeate verdicts, projecting institutional authority and moral legitimacy. These findings indicate that verdict texts are not ideologically neutral but discursive instruments that shape legal and cultural realities. Implication: This study’s implications underscore the need for critical awareness and reform in judicial writing practices to ensure transparency, protect defendants’ rights, and strengthen trust in Indonesia’s legal system. Novelty: This study elucidates how judicial language in Indonesian verdicts operates as a discursive mechanism that simultaneously structures legal reasoning, reconfigures agency, and reinforces institutional and ideological authority.
Legal language and power: a critical discourse analysis of anti-corruption laws in Indonesia Dani Setiaji
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): Language, power, and legal communication in Indonesia
Publisher : CV Narasi Khatulistiwa Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.67490/ijll.v1i1.525

Abstract

Background: Corruption in Indonesia remains a persistent challenge, and the Anti-Corruption Law (UU Tipikor) has long been criticized for embedding state-centered framings and ambiguous provisions that complicate consistent enforcement. Objective: The purpose of this study is to critically examine how the language of anti-corruption law constructs ideological authority and distributes institutional power. Method: Using a qualitative design, this research integrates Critical Discourse Analysis, legal semiotics, and modality pragmatics to analyze statutes, regulations, judicial decisions, and institutional documents as a comprehensive corpus. Results: The findings reveal three central patterns: first, ideological framings foreground kerugian negara (state losses) and kepentingan umum (public interest) while marginalizing direct reference to citizens; second, key terms such as penyelenggara negara, gratifikasi, and patut diduga demonstrate symbolic ambiguity that sustains state authority yet undermines legal certainty; third, the predominance of discretionary modality (dapat) over obligatory terms (wajib, harus) illustrates how linguistic structures empower enforcement bodies while weakening mandatory accountability. Implication: The implication is that reform efforts must address not only institutional design but also the ideological framing and linguistic construction embedded within legal texts. Novelty: This study interrogates how the linguistic and semiotic construction of anti-corruption law in Indonesia sustains institutional authority while embedding ambiguity that shapes power distribution and enforcement practices.
Plain language in legal drafting: challenges and opportunities in Indonesian regulatory reform Muhamamad Faiz Ramadhan
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): Language, power, and legal communication in Indonesia
Publisher : CV Narasi Khatulistiwa Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.67490/ijll.v1i1.526

Abstract

Background: The complexity of Indonesian legal drafting has long undermined public accessibility, as most statutes and regulations remain unreadable for the majority of citizens. Objective: The purpose of this research is to examine the challenges and opportunities of implementing plain language in Indonesian regulatory reform. Method: Using a mixed-method design, this study integrates readability analysis, syntactic complexity assessment, and discourse analysis on a corpus of statutory and regulatory texts. Results: The results show that Indonesian legal documents record very low readability scores, requiring graduate-level comprehension, and exhibit entrenched structural obstacles such as long sentences, passive constructions, and nominalizations. Discourse analysis further reveals that legal texts reproduce authority through formulaic expressions and intertextual references, limiting inclusivity and citizen engagement. However, plain language guidelines introduced by national agencies demonstrate that reform is feasible, offering pathways toward more accessible and participatory lawmaking. Implication: The implication of this study is that plain language reform is not merely a linguistic choice but a necessary institutional transformation for democratic governance. Novelty: This study highlights how entrenched linguistic and discursive conventions in Indonesian legal drafting limit public accessibility while demonstrating the transformative potential of plain language for more inclusive and participatory governance.
Linguistic construction of justice: a pragmatic analysis of judges’ reasoning in Indonesian constitutional court decisions Sadani
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): Language, power, and legal communication in Indonesia
Publisher : CV Narasi Khatulistiwa Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.67490/ijll.v1i1.527

Abstract

Background: Judicial decisions of constitutional courts not only resolve disputes but also construct justice through language, making the study of linguistic strategies in legal reasoning crucial in politically sensitive contexts. Objective: The purpose of this research is to examine how Indonesian Constitutional Court judges employ pragmatic strategies, argumentative structures, and modality to construct authority and legitimacy in their reasoning. Method: Using a qualitative, descriptive design, the study analyzed a corpus of five landmark Constitutional Court decisions, complemented by hearing transcripts and press releases, through pragmatic, argumentative discourse, and modality analysis. Results: The findings reveal three main patterns: first, judges frequently use implicatures, presuppositions, and indirect directives to embed implicit meanings and soften confrontational reasoning; second, deductive, analogical, and enthymematic structures are strategically combined to balance constitutional certainty with rhetorical persuasion; third, modality—especially deontic expressions like must and shall—dominates, alongside epistemic hedging and evaluative judgments, reflecting the Court’s dual need for authority and flexibility. Implication: These findings imply that judicial authority is linguistically constructed, and that pragmatic, argumentative, and modal strategies function not only to justify decisions but also to sustain public trust and democratic legitimacy. Novelty: This study demonstrates how pragmatic, argumentative, and modal strategies are strategically orchestrated in constitutional court decisions to construct judicial authority while negotiating legitimacy in politically sensitive contexts.
Language rights and legal identity: a sociolinguistic study of indigenous language representation in Indonesian law Putri Lu'lua Faiza Dwany
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): Language, power, and legal communication in Indonesia
Publisher : CV Narasi Khatulistiwa Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.67490/ijll.v1i1.528

Abstract

Background: Indonesia is one of the world’s most linguistically diverse nations, yet indigenous languages remain marginalized in legal frameworks that privilege Bahasa Indonesia as the sole language of governance. Objective: The aim of this research is to examine how Indonesian law represents, protects, or silences indigenous languages in constructing legal identity. Method: Using a qualitative design, this study employed sociolinguistic textual analysis, critical language policy analysis, and ideological discourse analysis on constitutional provisions, statutory laws, regional bylaws, and judicial decisions. Results: The results show three main findings: first, indigenous languages are inconsistently represented in national legal texts, with recognition largely symbolic and confined to cultural or educational domains; second, there are significant policy gaps, as constitutional guarantees of cultural rights lack enforcement mechanisms and regional protections remain fragmented; third, legal discourse reflects an ideology of centralism that elevates Bahasa Indonesia while relegating local languages to folklorized or peripheral roles. Implication: These findings imply that without systemic integration, indigenous languages risk symbolic survival but functional exclusion, underscoring the need for inclusive legal reforms that embed linguistic rights into governance and justice. Novelty: This study exposes how Indonesian legal discourse simultaneously recognizes and marginalizes indigenous languages, revealing a tension between symbolic acknowledgment and their exclusion from functional domains of governance.
Speech act strategies in police interrogation transcripts: evidence from bahasa Indonesia investigative records M. Ansori
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): Language, power, and legal communication in Indonesia
Publisher : CV Narasi Khatulistiwa Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.67490/ijll.v1i1.529

Abstract

Background: Police interrogation discourse in Indonesia plays a central role in shaping judicial outcomes, yet its linguistic dynamics remain underexplored in forensic linguistics. Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate speech act strategies, politeness patterns, and discursive structures in official interrogation transcripts (Berita Acara Pemeriksaan) written in Bahasa Indonesia. Method: This research employed a qualitative descriptive design, analyzing a corpus of interrogation records and trial excerpts using Speech Act Theory, Politeness Theory, and Forensic Discourse Analysis. Results: The results show that directive and assertive speech acts dominate interrogators’ language, while commissives and expressives are more common in suspects’ responses. Politeness strategies reveal a strong preference for bald on record forms by interrogators, contrasted with suspects’ reliance on positive and negative politeness to mitigate pressure. Discursive structures demonstrate institutional asymmetry, with interrogators controlling turns, topics, and narrative framing to legitimize official accounts. These findings confirm that interrogation discourse functions more as a tool of institutional authority than as a neutral exchange. Implication: The implication of this research is the need for greater awareness of linguistic power in legal processes and the incorporation of forensic linguistic insights into interrogation practices and justice reform. Novelty: This study reveals how interrogation discourse in Indonesia is systematically structured to reinforce institutional authority through asymmetric speech acts, politeness strategies, and narrative control.
Can artificial intelligence explain justice? evaluating faithfulness and legal reasoning in AI-generated summaries of Indonesian court decisions Ahmad Zairudin
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse Vol. 1 No. 2 (2026): Artificial intelligence, linguistic vulnerability, and digital justice in Indon
Publisher : CV Narasi Khatulistiwa Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.67490/ijll.v1i2.918

Abstract

Background: As Indonesian court decisions become increasingly accessible through public digital repositories, artificial intelligence promises to translate dense judicial language into readable summaries, yet this promise raises a central problem: whether accessibility can be achieved without weakening legal meaning. Objective: This study evaluates how AI-generated summaries of Indonesian court decisions preserve source faithfulness, legal reasoning, and public-facing explainability. Method: Using a qualitative-dominant evaluative design, this study compares ten source-linked AI summaries with ten Indonesian court decisions through structured coding of factual alignment, legal-basis accuracy, reasoning preservation, disposition fidelity, source traceability, and public-comprehension risk. Results: The findings show that AI summaries are strongest in preserving visible textual elements, especially case identity, general legal issue, and final disposition. They are less stable when summarising legal bases, procedural thresholds, interpretive qualifications, ratio decidendi, and uncertainty. Implication: This pattern indicates that AI can support legal accessibility but may also flatten judicial reasoning into outcome-centred explanation when source constraints are not preserved. Novelty: This study contributes a multidimensional framework for evaluating legal AI summaries by linking faithfulness, reasoning fidelity, and explainability as inseparable conditions for accountable public legal communication.
When synthetic speech becomes evidence: linguistic authentication and evidentiary uncertainty in Indonesian deepfake cases Rika Yani
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse Vol. 1 No. 2 (2026): Artificial intelligence, linguistic vulnerability, and digital justice in Indon
Publisher : CV Narasi Khatulistiwa Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.67490/ijll.v1i2.919

Abstract

Background: Synthetic speech and audio deepfakes increasingly unsettle legal assumptions that a recorded voice can index speaker identity, communicative intention, and evidentiary presence in Indonesian digital-public discourse. Objective: This study examines how synthetic or disputed speech becomes evidentially meaningful by analysing the linguistic authentication, evidentiary uncertainty, and procedural positioning of deepfake-related public documents in Indonesia. Method: Using a qualitative corpus-assisted legal-linguistic design, this study analyses 24 publicly verifiable documents consisting of official enforcement releases, fact-checking records, news reports, legal-context documents, and scholarly sources. Results: The findings show that authentication is constructed through convergence among detector claims, source tracing, official-account verification, platform context, and institutional classification rather than through acoustic judgement alone. Evidentiary uncertainty is not treated as a defect to be removed, but as a structured stance expressed through probability, absence, methodological caution, and legal-contextual framing. Implication: Synthetic speech is procedurally positioned most often through public verification and fact-checking before it enters, or potentially enters, formal adjudicative settings. Novelty: This study offers a novel forensic-linguistic account of deepfake evidence by shifting analysis from technical detection toward the legal-discursive process through which synthetic speech is authenticated, contested, and made evidentially intelligible under uncertainty.
Lost in legal translation: language rights, interpreter mediation, and procedural inequality in Indonesia’s multilingual courtrooms Gerry Kadamehang
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse Vol. 1 No. 2 (2026): Artificial intelligence, linguistic vulnerability, and digital justice in Indon
Publisher : CV Narasi Khatulistiwa Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.67490/ijll.v1i2.920

Abstract

Background: Indonesia’s multilingual legal order places courtroom language access at the centre of fair-trial protection, because defendants, witnesses, and justice seekers may encounter state law through Bahasa Indonesia, foreign languages, regional languages, indigenous languages, or sign-language mediation in criminal and civil proceedings. Objective: This study examines how language rights, interpreter mediation, and procedural inequality are articulated across public Indonesian legal and courtroom-related materials. Method: Using a qualitative corpus-assisted sociolegal design, this study analyses 34 public documents comprising legal norms, court-service texts, courtroom event reports, contextual human-rights standards, and scholarly sources, coded through a language-rights matrix, an interpreter-mediation grid, and a procedural-inequality register. Results: The findings show that language access is recognised across several institutional registers, but its operational mechanism is unevenly specified. Interpreter mediation becomes most visible when multilingualism disrupts ordinary courtroom procedure, especially in foreign-defendant cases, disability-related access, remote testimony, or documented interpreter presence. Implication: Procedural inequality appears as a gap between formal audibility and effective participation, where understanding, response, repair, and accountability remain unevenly distributed. Novelty: The novelty of this study lies in reframing courtroom interpreting in Indonesia as a condition of mediated legal participation rather than a technical supplement to legal translation within multilingual justice systems and access-to-justice research.
From legal assistance to automated authority: a critical discourse analysis of generative AI in Indonesian digital legal services Refai
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics and Legal Discourse Vol. 1 No. 2 (2026): Artificial intelligence, linguistic vulnerability, and digital justice in Indon
Publisher : CV Narasi Khatulistiwa Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.67490/ijll.v1i2.921

Abstract

Background: Indonesia’s expanding digital legal-service ecosystem has brought generative AI into public-facing legal assistance, yet its authority is increasingly produced through platform discourse before its professional, ethical, and regulatory boundaries are fully settled. Objective: This study aims to examine how generative AI is represented in Indonesian digital legal services and how such representation shifts AI from a tool of legal assistance toward a form of automated authority. Method: Using critical discourse analysis, this study analyses 27 publicly accessible documents consisting of platform pages, app descriptions, professional media articles, legal-policy documents, and regulatory-context materials. Results: Findings show that AI authority is constructed through professional research vocabulary, efficiency claims, innovation narratives, access-to-justice language, and references to regulatory accountability. Findings also indicate that users are positioned as self-service legal actors whose access to law is mediated by platform interfaces, automated summaries, guided consultation, and document-generation tools. Implication: Findings further reveal that accountability is unevenly articulated, with legal responsibility often dispersed across professionals, users, ethical soft regulation, data-protection discourse, and platform claims. Novelty: The novelty of this study lies in shifting Indonesian AI-law scholarship from adoption and regulation debates toward the discursive production of automated legal authority.

Page 1 of 2 | Total Record : 12

 1   2 

Filter by Year

2026 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 1 No. 2 (2026): Artificial intelligence, linguistic vulnerability, and digital justice in Indon Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): Language, power, and legal communication in Indonesia