REFORMASI HUKUM INDONESIA MELALUI LENSA FEMINIST LEGAL THEORY: MENYUSUN KEADILAN GENDER

Authors

  • Ardan Ardan Universitas Merdeka Malang
  • Rendra Bhaktie Kusuma Universitas Merdeka Malang
  • Solechan Solechan Universitas Merdeka Malang
  • Ardila Anjar Sari Universitas Merdeka Malang
  • Bimo Prasetyono Universitas Merdeka Malang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31943/yustitia.v11i1.333

Keywords:

Feminist Legal Theory, Legal Reform, Gender Justice, Indonesian Law

Abstract

This paper explores the urgency of legal reform in Indonesia through the lens of Feminist Legal Theory (FLT) as an alternative approach to building a more gender-just legal system. Indonesian law has long been shaped by patriarchal values that neglect the lived experiences and needs of women, particularly in cases of sexual violence, domestic discrimination, and unequal access to justice. FLT challenges the claim of legal neutrality and asserts that law is a social construct embedded within power relations. Using a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and case study approaches, this study examines how gender bias is reflected in legislation and legal enforcement, and how women's voices are often marginalized in formal legal processes. The analysis supports the notion that justice must not only be formal and procedural, but also substantive and contextually grounded in the social realities of vulnerable groups, especially women. Legal reform through FLT calls for the transformation of legal structures to become more responsive to gender issues and promotes the active participation of women in legislative and legal advocacy processes. Therefore, integrating feminist perspectives into legal policymaking is a strategic step toward achieving inclusive and transformative social justice in Indonesia.

Downloads

Published

2025-04-15

How to Cite

Ardan, A., Kusuma, R. B. ., Solechan, S., Sari, A. A. ., & Prasetyono, B. . (2025). REFORMASI HUKUM INDONESIA MELALUI LENSA FEMINIST LEGAL THEORY: MENYUSUN KEADILAN GENDER. Yustitia, 11(1), 54–69. https://doi.org/10.31943/yustitia.v11i1.333

Issue

Section

Articles