JurnalPost.com - Ethics is one of the primary foundations that distinguishes human life from the law of the jungle. It serves as a moral compass that guides law, power, and social life to remain anchored in the values of justice.
However, problems arise when the law is understood merely as a series of procedures and administrative requirements. In such circumstances, substantive truth risks being sidelined by what is considered formally correct on paper.
This is where one of the greatest challenges to the rule of law emerges: when something is deemed valid simply because it meets administrative requirements, while the public's sense of justice is ignored.
Justice should not stop at stamps, signatures, certificates, decrees, or legal documents. All these instruments should be means to discover and uphold the truth, not replacements for the truth itself.
When Procedure Becomes a Shield
Compliance with procedure is certainly an important part of law enforcement. Without clear procedures, the legal process could devolve into arbitrary action.
However, problems arise when procedures are instead used to obscure the substance of an issue.
In a number of disputes, for example, people who feel they have a right to land may find themselves in a weak position when facing parties with more complete administrative documentation. The case then potentially shifts from a question of who has the actual and historical right to merely who possesses the strongest documents.
Such situations demonstrate how important it is for judges and law enforcement officials not only to look at evidence formally but also to delve into the context and facts behind it.
A similar situation can occur in criminal cases or corruption cases. Procedural flaws can affect the legal process and even determine the continuation of a case.
On one hand, procedural rules must indeed be respected to protect everyone's rights. But on the other hand, law enforcement must also ensure that procedures do not turn into a space that can be exploited to evade accountability.
The issue is not the existence of procedures, but when procedures are treated as the ultimate goal.
Law Is More Than Just Administration
Laws, regulations, and state administration are essentially instruments for creating order and justice.
Therefore, the success of law enforcement should not be measured solely by whether all files are complete or every administrative stage has been passed.
The more fundamental question is: does the decision born from that process truly reflect a sense of justice?
When the answer to that question begins to be doubted by the public, the legitimacy of the legal system is at stake.
Administrative manipulation becomes dangerous when documents or formal mechanisms are used to provide a veneer of legality to something that is substantively problematic.
At that point, the law no longer functions as a tool to protect the public, but risks becoming an instrument that provides legitimacy to injustice.
The Ethical Responsibility of Law Enforcers
Judges, prosecutors, police, advocates, and bureaucrats have a responsibility far greater than merely following procedures.
Every authority they possess is inherently tied to moral responsibility.
A judge is indeed bound by the law. Prosecutors and police also work based on rules and procedural law. Likewise, bureaucrats must carry out administration based on regulations.
However, the law is never truly separated from values.
Behind every article lies a goal to be realized. Behind every procedure lies an interest to be protected. And behind every legal decision lies a human being who will feel the impact.
Therefore, the expression that someone is “just following the rules” should not be an excuse to turn a blind eye to the real consequences of a decision.
Legal professionalism actually requires the ability to understand the relationship between legal text, the purpose of its formation, and the public's sense of justice.
The Threat of Losing Public Trust
One of the most important assets in a rule-of-law state is public trust.
Courts may have magnificent buildings, authorities may have great power, and regulations may be drafted in great detail. But all of that will lose its meaning when the public no longer believes that the legal system is capable of delivering justice.
A crisis of trust usually does not happen overnight.
It grows slowly when the public sees inequality in law enforcement, processes deemed non-transparent, or decisions considered far from a sense of justice.
When such conditions persist for too long, the public may begin to view the law no longer as a place to seek justice, but as an arena that is more easily won by those who have power, access, legal knowledge, or economic resources.
Such a view is certainly dangerous for the sustainability of the rule of law.
Restoring the Spirit of Justice
It is time for law enforcement to be returned to its basic purpose: to provide justice.
Legal certainty remains important. Procedures are still necessary. Administration must remain orderly. But none of that should stand alone without considering the values of justice and utility.
Judges and law enforcement officials need to have the intellectual courage and integrity to dig deeper into facts, understand the context of a case, and not stop at a formal reading of documents.
A progressive legal approach is also important to continue developing, as long as it remains within the corridors of the constitution and statutory regulations.
Because good law is not law that is merely administratively orderly. Good law is law that is capable of protecting rights, preventing arbitrariness, and simultaneously providing justice that can be felt by the public.
Ultimately, documents are just tools. Articles are just instruments. Administration is just a mechanism.
The highest goal of all of that remains justice.
If one day the truth can be defeated simply because of procedural and administrative games, then it is not just the fate of one case that is threatened. What is at stake is the public's trust in the rule of law itself.
Wallahu a’lam.
The author is the General Chairman of the ICMI Youth.
Comments 0
Write a Comment Share your response