PARADIGMA LEGITIMASI HUKUM KONTEMPORER: INTERGRASI VALIDITAS FORMAL, JUSTIFIKASI MORAL, DAN PENERIMAAN SOSIAL DALAM PERSPEKTIF OTORITAS HUKUM JOSEPH RAZ
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69714/mra44m10Keywords:
Legal Authority, Joseph Raz, Legal Legitimacy, Service Conception of Authority, Inclusive Legal PositivismAbstract
This study aims to analyze Joseph Raz's concept of legal authority through the Service Conception of Authority and examine its relevance to inclusive legal positivism in reconstructing contemporary legal legitimacy. The study is motivated by the growing crisis of legal legitimacy, reflected in declining public trust in legal institutions and the widening gap between the formal validity of law and its social acceptance. This research employs a normative legal research method using both a conceptual approach and a statute approach. Primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials are analyzed qualitatively using a descriptive-analytical method. The findings indicate that legal legitimacy, according to Joseph Raz, depends not only on the formal validity of legal rules but also on the law's ability to provide individuals with better practical reasons for action through the dependence thesis, normal justification thesis, and pre-emption thesis. Inclusive legal positivism broadens the concept of legal validity by recognizing the role of moral values in determining legal validity. This study concludes that contemporary legal legitimacy should be reconstructed through the integration of formal validity, moral justification, and social acceptance, thereby producing a more adaptive and sustainable model of legal legitimacy for modern legal systems.
References
[1] Del Mar, M., & Lobban, M. (Eds.). (2023). Research handbook on legal positivism. Edward Elgar Publishing.
[2] Elviandri, D. K., & Absori. (2019). Quo Vadis negara kesejahteraan: Meneguhkan ideologi welfare state negara hukum kesejahteraan Indonesia. Mimbar Hukum, 31(2), 252.
[3] Elviandri, E. (2019). Quo Vadis welfare state: Strengthening the ideology of the welfare state of the Indonesian welfare state. Mimbar Hukum, 31(2), 252–266.
[4] Elviandri, K. D. A. (2019). Quo Vadis welfare state: Reaffirming the welfare state ideology of the Indonesian welfare state law.
[5] Harahap, P. K. (2025). Kedudukan peraturan presiden dalam hierarki peraturan perundang-undangan Indonesia. Asas Wa Tandhim: Jurnal Hukum, Pendidikan dan Sosial Keagamaan, 4(2), 233–248.
[6] Indikator Politik Indonesia. (2023, July). Evaluasi publik atas kinerja lembaga penegak hukum dan perpajakan. Indikator Politik Indonesia.
[7] Lembaga Survei Indonesia. (2024). Sikap publik terhadap putusan KPU, persidangan Mahkamah Konstitusi, dan isu nasional. Lembaga Survei Indonesia.
[8] Martin, B. (2024). Raz's appeal to law's authority. Philosophical Studies, 181(1), 267–280.
[9] Muhtamar, S., & Ashri, M. (2020). Dikotomi moral dan hukum sebagai problem epistemologis dalam konstitusi modern. Jurnal Filsafat, 30(1), 123–149.
[10] Placani, A. (2021). Joseph Raz's service conception and the limits of knowability. Ratio Juris, 34(3), 207–223.
[11] Positivisme hukum dan karakter formalistik penegakan hukum di Indonesia. (2025). Causa: Jurnal Hukum dan Kewarganegaraan, 16(2), 371–380. https://cibinstitute.id/index.php/causa/article/view/2906
[12] Putra, A. P., Sugianto, S., & Rana, M. (2024). Constitutional theory and practice: Connecting legal philosophy with legal reality. Jurnal Hukum Sehasen, 10(2), 531–534.
[13] Raz, J. (1986). The morality of freedom. Clarendon Press.
[14] Romero Muñoz, A. A. (2024). Joseph Raz, Aristóteles y el razonamiento con precedentes judiciales. Prudentia Iuris, (97), 105–129.
[15] Seputra, H. R., & Suyatno, S. (2024). Kekuasaan sebagai dasar legitimasi hukum dalam pemikiran filsafat hukum. Al-Mikraj: Jurnal Studi Islam dan Humaniora, 5(1), 1206–1217.
[16] Sharon, A. (2026). Authority and independence. Free & Equal: A Journal of Ethics and Public Affairs, 2(1).
[17] Silalahi, A. D. (2025). Acting rightly for the right reason: Joseph Raz's philosophical thoughts about authority. Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan, 14(3), 629–650. https://doi.org/10.25216/jhp.14.3.2025.629-650
[18] Spaak, T., & Mindus, P. (Eds.). (2021). The Cambridge companion to legal positivism. Cambridge University Press.
[19] Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law (Edisi Kedua.). Princeton University Press.
[20] Varga, C. (2021). Rule of law, contesting and contested. Central European Journal of Comparative Law, 2(1), 245–278.
[21] Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.
[22] Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 91/PUU-XVIII/2020.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Jurnal Padamu Negeri
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
