Legislative Drafting as Anticipatory Legal Interpretation: Minimizing Judicial-Creative Power Through Doctrinal Precision
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study examines the efficacy of legislative drafting as a mechanism for anticipatory legal interpretation in Indonesia's constitutional system, specifically analyzing whether doctrinal precision in statutory formulation reduces judicial-creative intervention. Through quantitative analysis of 2,847 judicial review decisions (2003-2024) and 45,891 Supreme Court cassation cases (2018-2025), this research demonstrates an inverse correlation between legislative drafting quality and judicial activism. Constitutional Court data reveals a 17% grant rate for judicial reviews, with 68% of successful challenges attributable to drafting ambiguities, internal inconsistencies, and inadequate normative precision. Supreme Court cassation statistics show 12.98-14.98% reversal rates, predominantly involving statutory interpretation conflicts. The findings indicate that legislation scoring above 75% on the Legislative Clarity Index experiences 73% fewer judicial interventions. This research employs regression analysis to isolate drafting quality as a predictive variable, controlling for political salience and constitutional significance. The study concludes that implementing rigorous doctrinal precision through enhanced academic research methodology, regulatory impact assessment, and systematic harmonization reduces judicial-creative power while strengthening legislative supremacy within Indonesia's separation of powers framework. These results provide empirical foundation for reforming Indonesia's legislative drafting protocols, particularly the Naskah Akademik (academic paper) requirement mandated since 2011, which current analysis reveals insufficient methodological rigor in 64% of examined cases
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Anugrah, N. P., & Hadi, S. (2025). Limitations on the Authority of the Constitutional Court as a Positive Legislator. DiH: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 272–284. https://doi.org/10.30996/dih.v0i0.132070
Arikunto, S. (2017). Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta, 2017.
El-Farahaty, H. (2025). Integrating Corpora and AI Tools in the Teaching, Learning, and Assessing of Arabic/English Legal Translation. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique, 38(6), 2031–2060. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-025-10281-0
Fernanda, V., Hafrida, H., & Lasmadi, S. (2025). Restitution for Child Victims as a Recovery Instrument: A Jurisprudential Analysis of Judicial Considerations in Criminal Cases. Jurnal Jurisprudence, 121–145. https://doi.org/10.23917/jurisprudence.v15i2.12317
Hasanah, N. R., & Irwan Triadi. (2025). Judicial Activism of the Constitutional Court in Progressive Law Discovery: Limitations, Checks and Balances, and the Threat of Becoming a Positive Legislator. Siyasah Dusturiyah: State Law Review, 1(3), 80–88. https://doi.org/10.65101/dv2vw205
Hermawan, M. D. A. (2025). Data and Technology Based Bureaucratic Governance Innovations: A Model for Strengthening Institutional Quality in Public Sector Reform in Indonesia. Journal Governance Bureaucratic Review, 2(3), 171–185. https://doi.org/10.31629/jgbr.v2i3.7964
Jasmi, M., Syafer, M., & Darajati, M. R. D. (2023). JURIDICAL IMPLICATIONS OF BUSINESS LICENSING REGULATIONS FOR OUTSOURCING COMPANIES POST CONSTITUTIONAL COURT DECISION NUMBER 91/PUU-XVIII/2020. Constitutional Law Society, 2(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.36448/cls.v2i2.46
Lindsey, T. (2018). Filling the Hole in Indonesia’s Constitutional System: Constitutional Courts and the Review of Regulations in a Split Jurisdiction. Constitutional Review, 4(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.31078/consrev412
Popko, Y. V. (2025). “Stabilization clause”: guaranteeing the rights of foreign investors and ensuring a favorable investment climate. Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, 2(91), 68–77. https://doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2025.91.2.8
Prasetianingsih, R. (2020). JUDICIAL ACTIVISM IN INDONESIA. PETITA: JURNAL KAJIAN ILMU HUKUM DAN SYARIAH, 5(2), 160–177. https://doi.org/10.22373/petita.v5i2.106
Salman, R., Sukardi, S., & Aris, M. S. (2018). JUDICIAL ACTIVISM OR SELF-RESTRAINT : SOME INSIGHT INTO THE INDONESIAN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT. Yuridika, 33(1), 145. https://doi.org/10.20473/ydk.v33i1.7279
Saragih, G. M., Nasution, M., & Sihombing, E. N. (2025). Judicial Review Oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi: Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Restraint dalam Perspektif Kebebasan Kehakiman. Jurnal Konstitusi, 22(1), 039–065. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk2213
Siregar, F. E. (2015). The Political Context of Judicial Review in Indonesia. Indonesia Law Review, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.15742/ilrev.v5n2.140
Sugeng, S., & Aidy, W. R. (2025). Legitimate Prejudice in Legal Interpretation: Gadamer’s Hermeneutics as an Analytical Framework. Jurnal Hukum Magnum Opus, 8(2), 186–206. https://doi.org/10.30996/jhmo.v8i2.12443
Sugiyono. (2019). Metode penelitian pendidikan: Pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.
Yafet Wambrauw, Manase Tabuni, Obet Nawipa, & Samuel Kogoya. (2025). THE DYNAMICS OF JUDICIAL POWER AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RULE OF LAW PRINCIPLES IN INDONESIA. International Journal of Education and Social Science Studies, 1(3), 171–176. https://doi.org/10.60153/ijesss.v1i3.238