•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Doctrinal uncertainty persists regarding the extent to which judges in Indonesia may adjudicate on the basis of equity and fairness, particularly in relation to requests for decisions grounded in ex aequo et bono. This issue is especially evident in civil proceedings, where such requests are frequently articulated in pleadings and closing statements. Drawing on an analysis of regulatory frameworks and judicial practice, and employing normative and comparative legal approaches, it is argued that adjudication grounded in equity—conceptually linked to fairness, propriety, and broader considerations of justice—constitutes an inherent component of judicial obligation in Indonesia. At the same time, requests for decisions based on ex aequo et bono commonly arise due to concerns about the adequacy of the justice embodied in the statutory provisions that form the basis of claims or charges. Such requests are often rooted in the mistaken assumption that the pursuit of legal certainty necessarily entails a compromise of justice, and, conversely, that prioritising justice requires disregarding positive law. It is therefore contended that a request to decide ex aequo et bono should not be interpreted as conferring unfettered discretion upon judges to set aside the law.

References

1. Fuller, Lon L. (Lon Luvois), 1902–1978. The Morality of Law. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1964
2. George, Mousourakis. Comparative Law and Legal Traditions: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives. Number 1. Springer Cham, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28281-3.
3. Harahap, M. Yahya. Hukum Acara Perdata: Tentang Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan, Pembuktian, Dan Putusan Pengadilan. Cet. 7. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2007.
4. ——. Pembahasan Permasalahan Dan Penerapan KUHAP: Pemeriksaan Sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi, Dan Peninjauan Kembali. 2nd ed. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2007.
5. Hart, H.L.A. (1961) The Concept of Law. 2nd Edition, Oxford University Press, London
6. Herrick, Paul. Think with Socrates: An Introduction to Critical Thinking. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. https://global.oup.com/us/companion.websites/9780199331864/stu/supplement/.
7. Holmes, Oliver Wendell. The Common Law. Project Gutenberg, 2000. https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/2449/pg2449-images.html.
8. Kelsen, Hans, and Max Knight. Pure Theory of Law. 1st ed. University of California Press, 1967. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.13167921.
9. Marsh, Joel Weinsheimer, Donald G. Truth, and Method Hans-Georg Gadam. Continuum Publishing Group. Third Edit. London: Continuum Publishing Group, 2004. https://web.mit.edu/kaclark/www/gadamer_truth_and_method.pdf.
10. Mertokusumo, Sudikno. Hukum Acara Perdata Indonesia. 6th, Cet. 2 ed. Yogyakarta: Liberty Yogyakarta, 2002.
11. Murray, R. J. K., and Kurt Wilk. The Legal Philosophies of Lask, Radbruch, and Dabin. The Philosophical Quarterly. Vol. 2. Harvard University Press, 1952. https://doi.org/10.2307/2960107.
12. Nasution, A. Karim. Masalah Surat Tuduhan Dalam Proses Pidana. Cetakan 2. Jakarta: C.V. Pantjuran Tudjuh, 1981.
13. Nusantara, Abdul Hakim G. dan Budiman Tanuredjo. Dua Kado Hakim Agung Buat Kedung Ombo : Tinjauan Putusan-Putusan Mahkamah Agung Tentang Kasus Kedung Ombo. 1st ed. Jakarta: ELSAM, 1997.
14. Mochtar Kusumaatmadja, and B. Arief Sidharta, S.H. Pengantar Ilmu Hukum : Suatu Pengenalan Pertama Ruang Lingkup Berlakunya Ilmu Hukum. Cet. Kedua. Bandung: Alumni, 2013.
15. Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Vol. 17. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1999.
16. Raz, Joseph. ``The Rule of Law and its Virtue.'' In The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality, 210–229. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979.
17. Sudirman, Antonius. Hati Nurani Hakim Dan Putusannya: Suatu Pendekatan Dari Perspektif Ilmu Hukum Perilaku (Behavior Jurisprudence) Kasus Hakim Bismar Siregar. Ed 1 Cet.1. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2007. https://doi.org/979-414-960-8.
18. Sukarno. Dibawah Bendera Revolusi. Djakarta: Panitia Dibawah Bendera Resolusi, 1963. Other Documents

19. Adams, Leslie Green and Thomas. ``Legal Positivism.'' Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Archive, 2019. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/legal-positivism/.
20. Agung, Mahkamah. ``Yurisprudensi Pemberhentian Pegawai,'' 2018. https://putusan3.mahkamahagung.go.id/yurisprudensi/detail/11eaecc78a7e3e109c30303935333535.html.
21. Alexy, Robert. ``Gustav Radbruch ' s Concept of Law.'' Pavol Jozef Šafárik University 26, no. 1946 (2006): 1–11. https://www.upjs.sk/app/uploads/sites/11/2022/10/Gustav-Radbruchs-Concept-of-law-.pdf
22. Auli, Renata Christha. ``7 Macam Aliran Hukum Dalam Rechtsvinding.'' Hukum Online. Accessed October 14, 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/7-macam-aliran-hukum-dalam-rechtsvinding-lt62d6502e32b2d/.
23. Bakardjieva Engelbrekt, Antonina. ``Legal and Economic Discourses on Legal Transplants: Lost in Translation?'' Scandinavian Studies in Law 60 (2015): 111–40.
24. ```Barang', Menurut Bismar.'' Tempo, 1983. https://www.tempo.co/hukum/-barang-menurut-bismar-1075412.
25. Bedner, Adriaan, and Jacqueline Vel. ``Legal Education in Indonesia.'' Indonesian Journal of Socio- Legal Studies 1, no. 1 (2021). https://doi.org/10.54828/ijsls.2021v1n1.6.
26. Bendor, Ariel L. ``The Relevance of the Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Restraint Discourse.'' Tulsa Law Review 47, no. 2 (2011): 331. https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/tlr/vol47/iss2/3/.
27. Bok, Hilary. ``Baron de Montesquieu, Charles-Louis de Secondat.'' The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2018. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/montesquieu/.
28. Botts, Tina. ``Legal Hermeneutics.'' Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, n.d. https://iep.utm.edu/leg-herm/.
29. Braithwaite, John. ``Restorative Justice: Theories and Worries.'' In 123Rd International Senior Seminar Visiting Experts' Papers, 47–56, 1989. https://www.antoniocasella.eu/restorative/Braithwaite2004.pdf.
30. Braithwaite, John Bradford. ``Restorative Justice and Responsive Regulation: The Question of Evidence.'' SSRN Electronic Journal, no. 5 (2017). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2839086.
31. Chintya, Aprina. ``Judicial Activism Dalam Putusan Hakim.'' Pengadilan Agama Purwodadi. Accessed October 14, 2025. https://pa-purwodadi.go.id/publikasi-transparansi-peradilan/artikel/357-judicial-activism-dalam-putusan-hakim.html.
32. Chua, Lynette J. ``Legal Mobilization and Authoritarianism.'' Annual Review of Law and Social Science 15 (2019): 355–76. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101518-043026.
33. Fachri, Ferinda K. ``Kasus Nenek Minah, Pembuka Fenomena Penerapan Restorative Justice.'' Hukum Online, 2023. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/kasus-nenek-minah–pembuka-fenomena-penerapan-restorative-justice-lt64ad8fa40c796/.
34. Foulkes, Albert S. ``On the German Free Law School (Freirechtsschule).'' ARSP: Archiv Für Rechts- Und Sozialphilosophie /Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy. Vol. 55, N (1969): 367–417. www.jstor.org/stable/23678930.
35. Glendon, Mary Ann, Paolo Carozza, and Max Rheinstein. ``Civil Law - Romano Germanic.'' Britannica. Encyclop\\aedia Britannica, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/topic/civil-law-Romano-Germanic.
36. Goodrich, Peter. ``Legal Hermeneutics.'' Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis, 1998. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780415249126-T016-1.
37. Radbruch, Gustav, Bonnie Litschewski Paulson and Stanley L. Paulson. ``Five Minutes of Legal Philosophy (1945).'' Oxford Journal of Legal Studies Vol. 26, N (2006). https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqi042.
38. Haferkamp, Prof. Dr. Hans-Peter. ``Begriffsjurisprudenz /Jurisprudence of Concepts.'' Enzyklopaedie Zur Rechtsphilosophie. Enzyklopaedie zur Rechtsphilosophie, 2011. http://www.enzyklopaedie-rechtsphilosophie.net/inhaltsverzeichnis/19-beitraege/105-jurisprudence-of-concept.
39. Hans, Hansen. ``Fallacies.'' In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman, Fall 2024. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, 2024. plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2024/entries/fallacies/.
40. Hill, L. M. ``Cases Concerning Equity and the Courts of Equity, 1550-1660, Vol.I: 1550-1611 and Vol.II: 1611-1660.'' The English Historical Review 119, no. 480 (2004): 202–3. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehr/119.480.202.
41. Himma, Kenneth Einar. ``Legal Positivism.'' Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed October 14, 2025. https://iep.utm.edu/legalpos/.
42. Huppes-cluysenaer, Liesbeth, Marjanne Termorshuizen-arts, Cassandra Steer, and Paul Scholten. ``General Method of Private Law, English Translation of the First Chapter of the General Volume of the Asser-Serie on Dutch Civil Law, Written by Paul Scholten'' 1 (2020): 306–430.
43. Indonesia, Mahkamah Agung Republik. Perkembangan Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara Dan Pokok-Pokok Hukum Tata Usaha Negara Dilihat Dari Beberapa Sudut Pandang. Jakarta: Mahkamah Agung RI, 2011.
44. King, Willard L. ``Denver Law Review Breakfast Theory of Jurisprudence'' 14, no. 6 (1937).
45. Lippu, Ivan. ``Ide Permaafan Hakim (Rechterlijk Pardon) : Sebuah Konsep Baru Dalam Rancangan KUHP.'' Pusat Analisis dan Informasi Hukum Nasional BPHN Kementerian Hukum RI, 2022. https://rechtsvinding.bphn.go.id/?page=artikel&berita=576.
46. Malpas, Jeff. ``Hans-Georg Gadamer.'' Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Archive. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2022. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/gadamer/.
47. Mandal, Shubham. ``Dominus Litis – Legal Maxim,'' n.d. https://www.centurylawfirm.in/blog/dominus-litis-legal-maxim/.
48. Mary Ann Glendon, Andrew D.E. Lewis, and Albert Roland Kiralfy. ``Common Law.'' Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/topic/common-law.
49. Mendenhall, Allen. ``Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. and the Darwinian Common Law Paradigm.'' European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy VII, no. 2 (2015): 0–21. https://doi.org/10.4000/ejpap.411.
50. Mittal, Monarch, John Austin's Theory of Command Law: Its Practicality in Today's World (May 31, 2022). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4157659 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4157659.
51. Neumann, Ulfrid. ``Naturrecht Und Positivismus Im Denken Gustav Radbruchs.'' In Vom Rechte, Das Mit Uns Geboren Ist, edited by Konrad Adenauer Foundation, 11–32. Freiburg Germany: Herder Publishing, 1933. https://www.kas.de/documents/252038/253252/Naturrecht_neumann.pdf/909dbdcf-898b-e233-541d-7463356c9621.
52. Oktavira, Bernadetha Aurelia. ``10 Asas Hukum Acara Perdata, Anak Hukum Wajib Tahu!'' Hukum Online, 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/asas-hukum-acara-perdata-lt62ac05c59f6cb/.
53. Radbruch, Gustav. ``Vanderbilt Law Review GustavRadbruch'' 14, no. 1 (1960).
54. RFQ. ``Ketika `Kehormatan' Wanita Dianalogikan Hakim Sebagai `Barang.''' Hukum Online, 2014. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/ketika-kehormatan-wanita-dianalogikan-hakim-sebagai-barang-lt54a40e07e7422/.
55. Salman, Radian, Sukardi Sukardi, and Mohammad Syaiful Aris. ``Judicial Activism or Self- Restraint: Some Insight into the Indonesian Constitutional Court.'' Yuridika 33, no. 1 (2018): 145. https://doi.org/10.20473/ydk.v33i1.7279.
56. Sari, Ayutia Nurita. ``Berlaku Sopan Di Pengadilan Ringankan Hukuman, Ini Faktanya.'' DJKN Kementerian Keuangan, 2022. https://www.djkn.kemenkeu.go.id/kanwil-suluttenggomalut/baca-artikel/14847/Berlaku-Sopan-di-Pengadilan-Ringankan-Hukuman-Ini-Faktanya.html.
57. School, Cornell Law. ``Beyond a Reasonable Doubt,'' 2025. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/beyond_a_reasonable_doubt.
58. ———. ``Legal Realism,'' 2023. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/legal_realism.
59. ———. ``Preponderance of the Evidence,'' 2022. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/preponderance_of_the_evidence.
60. Sen, Amartya. The Idea of Justice. Journal of Human Development. Vol. 9, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649880802236540.
61. Subagyono, B. S. A., J. Wahyudi, and R. Akbar (2014). ``Kajian Penerapan Asas Ultra Petita Pada Petitum Ex Aequo Et Bono''. Yuridika, 29(1). https://doi.org/10.20473/ydk.v29i1.360.
62. Kouwagam, S. U. (2020), How lawyers win land conflicts for corporations: Legal Strategy and its influence on the Rule of Law in Indonesia, unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Leiden University.
63. Wu, Zhongmin. Why Is Social Justice Possible? Social Justice Issues during China's Period of Transition. The Commercial Press, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-5380-2.
64. Yudisial, Komisi. ``Penegakan Hukum Wujudkan Keadilan, Kepastian, Dan Kemanfaatan Hukum,'' 2017. https://www.komisiyudisial.go.id/frontend/news_detail/514/penegakan-hukum-wujudkan-keadilan-kepastian-dan-kemanfaatan-hukum. Legal Documents

65. Herzien Inlandsch Reglement (H.I.R).
66. Law Number 14 Of 1970 on the Basic Provisions of Judicial Power.
67. Law Number 8 Of 1981 on on Indonesia's Criminal Procedure Law.
68. Law Number 5 Of 1986 on on Administrative Court.
69. Law Number 35 Of 1999 on on Amendments to Law Number 14 Of 1970 on Basic Provisions on Judicial Power.
70. Law Number 4 Of 2004 on on Judicial Power.
71. Law Number 48 Of 2009 on on Judicial Power.
72. Rechtsreglement voor de Buitengewesten (RBg).
73. Reglement op de Rechtsvordering (RV).
74. Supreme Court Circular Letter Number 1 Of 2017.

Download

Share

COinS