Constitutional Struggles and the Court in Indonesia’s Turn to Authoritarian Politics

Q3 Social Sciences Federal Law Review Pub Date : 2022-06-27 DOI:10.1177/0067205X221107404
H. P. Wiratraman
{"title":"Constitutional Struggles and the Court in Indonesia’s Turn to Authoritarian Politics","authors":"H. P. Wiratraman","doi":"10.1177/0067205X221107404","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Indonesia’s politics has changed dramatically during Jokowi’s administration. Numbers of scholars argued this situation turns to a ‘new model of authoritarianism’ or declining democracy. The situation is generally referred to as the strengthening of authoritarian politics. Meanwhile, in such situation, the role of the judiciary is the key to balancing power in authoritarian politics. However, in reality, efforts to encourage constitutional struggle through the judiciary will easily reverse the situation to lose its independence. The court could play a significant role in authoritarian politics. This phenomenon has been called the ‘judicialisation of authoritarian politics’. This article dissects how the process of authoritarian political institutionalisation through law and the courts has occurred in the two decades after Suharto’s reforms. Then it examines how civil society changes and the democracy movement have made it possible to advance constitutional rights in the context of Indonesia’s cartel politics and the judicialisation of authoritarian politics. The legal argument for such judicial practice is that authoritarianism has been increasingly institutionalised, facilitating oligarchy networks in a cartelised political system, so that law and the judiciary merely work to strengthen the chain of impunity.","PeriodicalId":37273,"journal":{"name":"Federal Law Review","volume":"50 1","pages":"314 - 330"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Federal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0067205X221107404","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Indonesia’s politics has changed dramatically during Jokowi’s administration. Numbers of scholars argued this situation turns to a ‘new model of authoritarianism’ or declining democracy. The situation is generally referred to as the strengthening of authoritarian politics. Meanwhile, in such situation, the role of the judiciary is the key to balancing power in authoritarian politics. However, in reality, efforts to encourage constitutional struggle through the judiciary will easily reverse the situation to lose its independence. The court could play a significant role in authoritarian politics. This phenomenon has been called the ‘judicialisation of authoritarian politics’. This article dissects how the process of authoritarian political institutionalisation through law and the courts has occurred in the two decades after Suharto’s reforms. Then it examines how civil society changes and the democracy movement have made it possible to advance constitutional rights in the context of Indonesia’s cartel politics and the judicialisation of authoritarian politics. The legal argument for such judicial practice is that authoritarianism has been increasingly institutionalised, facilitating oligarchy networks in a cartelised political system, so that law and the judiciary merely work to strengthen the chain of impunity.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
印尼转向威权政治的宪法斗争与法院
佐科维执政期间,印尼的政治发生了巨大变化。许多学者认为,这种情况变成了“威权主义的新模式”或民主的衰落。这种情况通常被称为专制政治的加强。与此同时,在这种情况下,司法机构的作用是威权政治中平衡权力的关键。然而,在现实中,通过司法机构鼓励宪法斗争的努力很容易扭转失去独立性的局面。法院可以在独裁政治中发挥重要作用。这种现象被称为“威权政治的司法化”。本文剖析了在苏哈托改革后的二十年里,通过法律和法院实现威权政治制度化的过程。然后,它考察了公民社会的变化和民主运动如何使在印度尼西亚卡特尔政治和威权政治司法化的背景下推进宪法权利成为可能。这种司法实践的法律论据是,威权主义越来越制度化,为卡特尔政治体系中的寡头网络提供了便利,因此法律和司法机构只会加强有罪不罚的链条。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Federal Law Review
Federal Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊最新文献
No Place Like Home? Alienage, Popular Sovereignty and an Implied Freedom of Entry into Australia Under the Constitution Traversing Uncharted Territory? The Legislative and Regulatory Landscape of Heritable Human Genome Editing in Australia Foreign Interference and the Incremental Chilling of Free Speech Reviewing Review: Administrative Justice and the Immigration Assessment Authority Managing Ownership of Copyright in Research Publications to Increase the Public Benefits from Research
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1