11 - The Constitutional Court

Summary

This chapter draws on Daniel S. Lev’s work on Indonesian law and legal culture to assess the Constitutional Court’s role in the reformasi. One of the central themes running though Lev’s work, the chapter notes, was the idea that law’s claim to authority as an autonomous body of norms is invariably a function of politics – of the middle class’s need to promote this quintessentially liberal idea of law to further its own interests. On the other hand, Lev also recognised that societies generally prosper where there is public confidence in precisely this conception of law. This tension in Lev’s work may be resolved, the chapter argues, if law’s autonomy from politics is seen as being, not an empirically provable fact, but a constitutional-cultural ideology that may take hold under certain conditions. The third section uses this modified Levian conceptual framework to examine the Indonesian Constitutional Court’s role in promoting the rule of law after the constitutional reforms of 1999–2002. While the Court has made admirable strides, the chapter argues, its vacillation between a legalist and an instrumentalist conception of law has inhibited the consolidation of a stable societal understanding of its legitimate role in tempering the exercise of political power. The chapter conclusions on this score, despite differences of conceptualisation, demonstrate how vitally important Lev’s work still is to the fate of the Indonesian ‘law-state’.