Improving Legal Argument Critically in the Litigation Mechanism in Indonesia (An Empirical Study of Environmental Verdicts)

Abstract

Legal argument is a debate or argument in explaining the issues between two or more people performed in court. Legal argument is one way to perform law finding with the purpose to avoid legal vacuum when the judge makes a legal reasoning in a verdict. In making a legal argument, it is at least performed by legal reasoning, logic, facts. However, some judges, in making a decision, did not use the legal arguments by legal reasoning and facts so that it resulted in debates and arguments. It is interesting to study on how to build legal argument in the litigation mechanism in Indonesia. Some verdicts in Indonesia have been the debate among the public through social media, by both academic and non-academic communities, because they were not based on the legal facts revealed at the trials and not in favor of the public sense of justice. Some of the examples are the verdict in the case of the environmental lawsuits of Lapindo Brantas Mud in Sidoarjo, the case verdict in Palembang District Court on the lawsuit filed by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry on forest fires and land concessions of PT. Bumi Mekar Hijau in 2014. From the decisions, it turned out that the judges, in making the legal arguments for their decisions, had deviated from the analogy and were not based on the existing legal facts. In building legal arguments, it would have to be conducted by collecting data (evidence) and clear fact so that its solutions do not deviate from the rules of law

Building A Legal Reasoning Based on Environmental Conservation in Indonesia

“…The judiciary plays an important role in managing these legal arrangements and ensuring compliance with the rule of law. Apart from individual interests in environmental issues, the emergence of collective interests in the environment has been the catalyst for introducing new legal doctrines [37].…”

The Sanctions on Environmental Performances: An Assessment of Indonesia and Brazilia Practice

“…39 Van Hamel defines punishment as a particular type of suffering imposed by the competent authority to impose a sentence on behalf of the state as the person responsible for public law involvement for an offender, namely solely because the offender has violated a legal regulation that must be upheld by the country. 40 Although there is a little distinction in their usage, criminal and punishment are frequently similar terms. People outside of criminal law are permitted to use the term punishment.…”

Comparison of Covid-19 Handling Between Timor-Leste and Indonesia in a Responsive Legal Perspective

“…(Cheng, 2018) This analysis focuses on all the secondary data obtained, after obtaining the necessary data, this paper analyzes the data logically, systematically and juridically. Logical means that the data collected is analyzed in accordance with the principles of deductive logic, namely drawing conclusions from a general problem to the concrete problems faced.. (Lisdiyono, 2017) Systematic means analyzing data with one another that are interconnected and dependent. Furthermore, the data were analyzed juridically, namely starting from the existing regulations and related to the positive law that is currently in effect.…”