Realizing Substantive Justice in Court Decisions and its Implementation According to Law Number 48 of 2009 Concerning the Principles of Judicial Power

Abstract

This study examines how justice is understood and realized in court decisions through an analysis of principles, indicators, and the dynamics of judicial reasoning. Court decisions are viewed as important instruments in maintaining legal certainty as well as reflections of the judiciary’s response to substantive justice values within society. This research employs a juridical approach by combining regulatory analysis, theories of justice, and case studies of court decisions. The findings indicate that justice is not only measured by the conformity of decisions with legal norms, but also by judges’ ability to balance legal certainty, utility, and social justice. Comprehensive, transparent, and contextual judicial reasoning is the primary determinant of decision quality. However, the study also identifies various challenges, such as unequal access to legal resources, limitations in evidence, socio-political pressures, and structural bias that may hinder the realization of justice. These findings highlight the need to strengthen judges’ capacity in applying substantive justice approaches, improve evidentiary mechanisms, and develop decision-making models that are more responsive to social values. Furthermore, enhancing public legal literacy is considered essential to support a more legitimate and inclusive judicial system