Konstruksi Relasi Kesejahteraan Hakim Dengan Kualitas Kinerja Yudisial Yang Berkeadilan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25216/ikahi.2.3.12.2024.305-324Keywords:
Kualitas Putusan, Kesejahteraan Hakim, KeadilanAbstract
The relationship between the welfare of judges and the quality of decisions is an interesting legal issue. Besides theoretically not many have discussed it, empirically this topic has become a massive discussion, especially among judges. This article is one of the important and original contributions to fill the void of research related to the relationship between judge welfare and the quality of decisions. The research is based on three problem formulations 1) How do judges view their current and expected salaries? 2) How is the relationship and influence between judges' welfare and the quality of decisions? 3) How is the construction of the relationship between judges' welfare and the quality of justice decisions? This research is included in empirical legal research with a socio legal approach. The technique of collecting legal materials and data was obtained by in-depth interviews with respondents who had been determined by purposive sampling technique. The findings of the study resulted in; First, the welfare of judges is still relatively lacking, this is seen in terms of professional responsibilities and workload as well as from several comparisons of judges' salaries in several countries. Second, there is an indirect relationship between judges' welfare and the quality of decisions and the relationship between the two has a positive effect. Third, the construction of a positive relationship between judges' welfare and the quality of decisions. This is legitimised theoretically from the perspective of both economic theory and legal realism. Empirically, it is concluded that although the welfare of judges is not an instrument to produce just decisions, empirically the welfare of judges is a necessity.
References
Agung, Mahkamah. Putusan Mahkamah Agung 23 P/HUM/2018, 2018.
Aletras, Nikolaos, Dimitrios Tsarapatsanis, Daniel Preoţiuc-Pietro, and Vasileios Lampos. “Predicting Judicial Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: A Natural Language Processing Perspective.” PeerJ Computer Science 2 (October 24, 2016): e93. https://peerj.com/articles/cs-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.93
Alkostar, Artidjo. “Tantangan Hakim Dalam Era Globalisasi.” Varia peradilan 270 (2008).
Anderson, James M., and Eric Heiland. “How Much Should Judges Be Paid? An Empirical Study on the Effect of Judicial Pay on the State Bench.” Stanford Law Review 64, no. 5 (2012): 1277–1341.
Baker, Scott. “Should We Pay Federal Circuit Judges More?” Boston University Law Review 88, no. 63 (2008): 63–112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.998395
Banasik, Przemysław, Katarzyna Metelska-Szaniawska, Małgorzata Godlewska, and Sylwia Morawska. “Determinants of Judges’ Career Choices and Productivity: A Polish Case Study.” European Journal of Law and Economics 53, no. 1 (February 2022): 81–107. https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10657-021-09688-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-021-09688-4
Barry, Brian M. How Judges Judge. Informa Law from Routledge, 2020. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9780429659935. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429023422
Capurso, Timothy J, and Benjamin N Cardozo. “How Judges Judge: Theories on Judicial Decision Making.” University of Baltimore Law Forum 29, no. 1 (1998). http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/lf%0Ahttp://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/lf/vol29/iss1/2.
Chen, Daniel L. “Judicial Analytics and the Great Transformation of American Law.” Artificial Intelligence and Law 27, no. 1 (March 10, 2019): 15–42. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10506-018-9237-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-018-9237-x
Chen, Daniel L., Tobias J. Moskowitz, and Kelly Shue. “Decision Making Under the Gambler’s Fallacy: Evidence from Asylum Judges, Loan Officers, and Baseball Umpires *.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 131, no. 3 (August 1, 2016): 1181–1242. https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/131/3/1181/2590011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjw017
Choi, Stephen J., G. Mitu Gulati, and Eric A. Posner. “Are Judges Overpaid?: A Skeptical Response to the Judicial Salary Debate.” Journal of Legal Analysis 1, no. 1 (January 1, 2009): 47–117. http://academic.oup.com/jla/article/1/1/47/889029. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/jla.v1i1.3
Deyneli, Fatih. “Analysis of Relationship between Efficiency of Justice Services and Salaries of Judges with Two-Stage DEA Method.” European Journal of Law and Economics 34, no. 3 (December 10, 2012): 477–493. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10657-011-9258-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-011-9258-3
Efendi, Dr. Jonaedi, and Prof. Dr. Johnny Ibrahim. Metode Penelitian Hukum: Normatif Dan Empiris. Cet.2. Depok: Prenada Media Group, 2018.
Haines, Charles Grove. “General Observations on the Effects of Personal Political and Economic Influences in the Decisions of Judges.” Illnois Law Review 17, no. 2 (1996): 96–116.
Indonesia, Ikatan Hakim. Susun RPJMN 2025-2029, Kementerian PPN/BAPPENAS Gelar FGD Tentang Kesejahteraan Hakim, 2024. https://ikahi.or.id/berita/susun-rpjmn-2025-2029--kementerian-ppn-bappenas-gelar-fgd-tentang-kesejahteraan-hakim.
Indonesia, Pemerintah Pusat. Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) Nomor 94 Tahun 2012 Tentang Hak Keuangan Dan Fasilitas Hakim Yang Berada Di Bawah Mahkamah Agung, 2012.
Indonesia, Sekretaris Mahkamah Agung Republik. Keputusan Sekretaris Mahkamah Agung No. 1068/Sek/SK/XII/2019 Tentang Standar Biaya Rumah Dinas Dan Transportasi Hakim Bagi Hakim Dan Hakim AD HOC Dilingkungan Mahkamah Agung Dan Badan Peradilan Yang Berada Dibawahnya Tahun Anggaran 2020-2022, 2019.
Marks, Stephen. “A Comment on the Relationship between Judicial Salary and Judicial Quality.” Boston University Law Review 88, no. 3 (2008): 843–853.
Polhukam, Kemenko. Rekomendasi Agenda Prioritas Percepatan Reformasi Hukum: Laporan Tim Percepatan Reformasi Hukum, 2023.
Rahardjo, Satjipto. Penegakan Hukum: Suatu Tinjauan Sosiologis. Cet.1. Yogyakarta: Genta publishing, 2009.
Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Oxford University Press, 1999.
Rizki, Mochamad Januar. Mengurai Problem Kesejahteraan Hakim Yang Masih Jauh Dari Ideal, 2024. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/mengurai-problem-kesejahteraan-hakim-yang-masih-jauh-dari-ideal-lt65c9f079453b0/.
Somantri, Gumilar Rusliwa. “Memahami Metode Kualitatif.” Makara Human Behavior Studies in Asia 9, no. 2 (December 1, 2005): 57. https://scholarhub.ui.ac.id/hubsasia/vol9/iss2/8/. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7454/mssh.v9i2.122
Supandi. “Lembaga Peradilan, Kualitas Profesionalisme Dalam Proses Pembaruan Dan Konsekuensi Terhadap Pencederaan Etika Profesi.” Varia Peradilan Majalah Hukum, 2010.
Tampubolon, Manotar, Tomson Situmeang, and Paltiada Saragih. “Judicial Breakfast as an External Factor in Judicial Decision Making in Courts.” F1000Research 12 (January 4, 2023): 9. https://f1000research.com/articles/12-9/v1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.126482.1
Yudho, Winarno. Sosok Guru Dan Ilmuwan Yang Kritis Dan Konsisten: Kumpulan Tulisan Peringatan 70 Tahun Prof. Soetandyo Wignjosoebroto. Jakarta: ELSAM, 2002.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Ikahi - Ikatan Hakim Indonesia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
License and Copyright Agreement
In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal. Please also carefully read our Posting Your Article Policy here.
- The work is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
- The work has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.
Copyright
Authors who publish with Judex Laguens agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and earlier and greater citation of published work.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
