Eko Agustinus

Individual Freedom in the Legal Discourse in Indonesia

Introduction

Individual freedom in the legal discourse in indonesia. Explore individual freedom in Indonesian legal discourse. Law protects rights and upholds justice (1945 Constitution Art. 28 E), but freedom has limits and responsibilities.

Abstract

Indonesia is one of the countries included in the state law. Law is a rule that can not be separated from our daily life where every joint of our lives is in the shade of law. Laws other than to protect us from abuse of power, the law is also used to uphold justice. This freedom is the hallmark of modern society today. But freedom has certain qualities. A free individual does not mean that they can do things themselves, such as damaging their surroundings, destroying other people's goods, harassing a man's wife or husband and so on. Of the 1945 Constitution Article 28 E is Everyone is free to embrace religion and worship according to his religion, choosing education and teaching, choosing a job, choosing citizenship, choosing a residence in the territory of the country and abandoning it, and the right to return, Everyone has the right to freedom of belief, expression of thoughts and attitudes, in accordance with his conscience, Everyone has the right to freedom of association, assembly, and expression.

Review

The paper addresses a highly pertinent and significant topic concerning individual freedom within the legal framework of Indonesia. While the title promises an examination of "legal discourse," the abstract, in its current form, functions more as a general introduction to the broad concepts of law and freedom in Indonesia rather than a summary of a specific research study. It outlines the foundational role of law, the modern emphasis on freedom, and the inherent limitations on individual liberty, culminating in a direct citation of Article 28 E of the 1945 Constitution. However, it largely omits the essential elements typically found in an academic abstract, such as the specific research question, the methodology employed, or the unique argument and key findings of the paper. A primary concern is the absence of any stated methodology or analytical approach for examining "legal discourse." The abstract describes the context and lists constitutional provisions, but it does not articulate *how* the authors intend to analyze this discourse – whether through textual analysis of legal documents, jurisprudential review, or a critical discourse analysis of relevant debates. Furthermore, the abstract lacks a clear thesis statement or a specific argument that the paper aims to develop or defend. The illustrative examples provided ("damaging their surroundings, destroying other people's goods, harassing a man's wife or husband and so on"), while true, contribute to a less formal tone than typically expected in academic writing and do not advance a particular analytical point. To significantly strengthen this work, the authors should revise the abstract to clearly articulate the paper's specific objective, the methodology used to analyze "individual freedom in the legal discourse," and the main argument or unique contribution it offers. For instance, is the paper analyzing judicial interpretations, legislative debates, or scholarly commentary on freedom? Specifying the scope of "legal discourse" would greatly enhance clarity. A more focused abstract that outlines the research question, analytical framework, and anticipated findings would allow readers to better understand the paper's scope, rigor, and potential impact on the academic understanding of individual freedom in Indonesian law.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.