Judicial Welfare and Legal Decision Quality in Indonesia: Normative Gaps and Reform Directions
Abstract
This study investigates the impact of judicial welfare particularly salary structures, allowances, and institutional support on the quality of judicial decisions in Indonesia. Amid a wave of reform marked by Government Regulation Number 44 of 2024 and the 2025 salary adjustment policy, questions persist regarding whether financial improvements alone can ensure judicial independence and reasoning integrity. Using a normative legal research approach combined with doctrinal analysis and comparative jurisprudence, this paper examines salary disparities, workload imbalances, and structural gaps across judicial tiers. Findings reveal that trial-level judges continue to face excessive caseloads, inadequate access to legal resources, and limited professional development despite recent financial reforms. These structural deficiencies contribute to formalistic adjudication, reduced legal innovation, and vulnerability to ethical fatigue. The study affirms that judicial welfare reform must go beyond monetary adjustments and integrate performance-based incentives, reasoning-focused evaluation systems, and equitable institutional infrastructure. Drawing on theories of justice and motivation, the research offers a multidimensional framework for understanding how welfare structures influence judicial output. It concludes that sustained judicial quality and independence require a holistic policy response that bridges normative ideals and institutional realities.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Books:
Cotterrell, Roger. Sociological Jurisprudence: Justice, Morality, and the Law. Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2020.
Dworkin, Ronald. Law’s Empire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986.
Frank, Jerome. Law and the Modern Mind. New York: Anchor Books, 1963.
Herzberg, F., B. Mausner, and B. C. Snyderman. The Motivation to Work. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 1959.
Kellerhals, Andreas. Continuing Legal Education: Ambition and Reality. Zürich: EIZ Publishing, 2023.
Luhmann, Niklas. Law as a Social System. Edited by Klaus A. Ziegert. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971.
Skaar, Ellin, Jemima Garcia-Godos, and Cath Collins. Transitional Justice in Latin America and beyond: The Role of Judiciary. Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2020.
Journal:
Allioui, Samira. “How to Measure the Quality of Judicial Reasoning?” International Journal for Court Administration 13, no. 2 (2022). https://doi.org/10.36745/IJCA.396.
Arana Araya, Ignacio, Melanie M. Hughes, and Aníbal Pérez-Liñán. “Judicial Reshuffles and Women Justices in Latin America.” American Journal of Political Science 65, no. 2 (2021): 373–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/AJPS.12543.
Elholm, Thomas. “EPPO and a Common Sense of Justice.” Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 28, no. 2 (April 2021): 212–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X211005970.
Elovin, Muhammad Naufal Elovin. "Hukum Dan Kesejahteraan Masyarakat." Journal of Law and Social Change Review 2, no. 01 (2025): 72-82.
Elviandri, Elviandri. "Quo vadis negara kesejahteraan: meneguhkan ideologi welfare state negara hukum kesejahteraan indonesia." Old Website of Jurnal Mimbar Hukum 31, no. 2 (2019): 252-266.
Farnesty, Eizeluna, Fenny Rahma Sari, Raihan Dzaky, Rani Bela Septia, Siti Balqis Alayya, Syifa Maura Adinda, and Vina Khalisa. “Etika Profesi Hukum: Mengungkap Pelanggaran Kode Etik Dalam Kasus Suap Pengacara.” Aliansi: Jurnal Hukum, Pendidikan Dan Sosial Humaniora 1, no. 6 (October 2024): 98–116. https://doi.org/10.62383/ALIANSI.V1I6.555.
Gandur, Martín, Amanda Driscoll, Sivaram Cheruvu, Holger Kern, Jeffrey Staton, Daniel Brinks, Rachel Cichowski. “Trust in the Judiciary and Partisan Reactions to Judicial Checks: Evidence from Argentina.” British Journal of Political Science 55, no. 3 (2025): 126.
Garita, René Palacios. “Rule of Law, Budget and Management by Results of Judicial Institutions in Latin America: An Approximation.” Revista Internacional Consinter de Direito, 12, no. 2 (2023): 333-345.
Hammergren, L. “Measuring Justice: Quality Indicators in Judicial Reform.” World Justice Review 12, no. 1 (2020): 88–104.
Katheeri, Hamad Al, and Norliah Kudus. “Effect of Innovation on the Relationship of Knowledge Management Process and Digital Service Performance in UAE Judicial System Model.” International Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering and Technology 15, no. 1 (February 2024): 88–99. https://doi.org/10.30880/ijscet.2024.15.01.007.
Kusyandi, Adi, and Saefullah Yamin. "Disparitas Putusan Hakim Pidana Berkualitas Yang Mencerminkan Rasa Keadilan Dalam Sistem Hukum Indonesia." Yustitia 9, no. 1 (2023): 122-132.
Larkins, C. M. “Judicial Independence in Practice: Germany and the UK Compared.” Journal of Comparative Legal Studies 15, no. 2 (December 2021): 77–93. https://doi.org/10.31078/CONSREV1023.
Nasir, Melisa, Elmi Khoiriyah, Bagus Priyono Pamungkas, Inas Hardianti, and Raesitha Zildjianda. "Kedudukan Hukum dalam Mewujudkan Keadilan dan Kesejahteraan di Indonesia." Al-Manhaj: Jurnal Hukum Dan Pranata Sosial Islam 5, no. 1 (2023): 241-254.
Nuswardani, Nunuk. "Upaya Peningkatan Kualitas Putusan Hakim Agung Dalam Mewujudkan Law And Legal Reform." Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum 16, no. 4 (2009): 515-532.
Ranabhat, Deepesh, Bhawana Sharma Timilsina, and Mala Ranabhat. “Job Satisfaction of Female Employees in Commercial Banks of Pokhara.” INTELLIGENCE Journal of Multidisciplinary Research 2, no. 1 (March 2023): 69–80. https://doi.org/10.3126/IJMR.V2I1.53623.
Sanchez-Gomez, Martin, Gabriele Giorgi, Georgia Libera Finstad, Federico Alessio, Antonio Ariza-Montes, Giulio Arcangeli, and Nicola Mucci. “Economic Stress at Work: Its Impact over Absenteeism and Innovation.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 10 (May 2021): 5265. https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH18105265.
Sasmito, Joko, Erwin Owan HS, and Bahtiyar Effendi. “The Importance of The Judicial Commission’s Commitment in The Implementation of The State.” Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi Dan Kajian Hukum 21, no. 2 (December 2022). https://doi.org/10.31941/PJ.V21I2.2679.
Solum, Lawrence B. “Virtue Jurisprudence a Virtue-Centred Theory of Judging.” Metaphilosophy 34, no. 1–2 (2003): 178–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9973.00268.
Wang, Xiang, Changwei Guo, Yuwen Lyu, and Shouchao Zhu. “Why Do People Choose Courts to Resolve Disputes? A Fuzzy-Set Analysis of Chinese Citizens’ Judicial Reliance.” Frontiers in Psychology 13 (January 2023): 1015987. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2022.1015987.
Widianto, A, and S Wijaya. “Judicial Reasoning and Motivation: Indonesian Judges in the Reform Era.” Asian Journal of Law and Society 7, no. 3 (2022): 233-245.
Website:
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). “Evaluation Report on European Judicial Systems.” CEPEJ, 2022. https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/special-file-report-european-judicial-systems-cepej-evaluation-report-2022-evaluation-cycle-2020-data-, accessed on July 23, 2025.
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). “Evaluation Report on European Judicial Systems 2020 Evaluation Cycle (2018 Data).” CEPEJ, 2020. https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/special-file-publication-of-the-report-european-judicial-systems-cepej-evaluation-report-2020-evaluation-cycle-2018-data-, accessed on July 13, 2025.
Liputan 6. “Gaji Hakim 2025 Naik Drastis, Ini Rincian Lengkapnya - News Liputan6.Com,” Liputan 6, June 2024. https://www.liputan6.com/news/read/6051998/gaji-hakim-2025-naik-drastis-ini-rincian-lengkapnya, accessed on July 21, 2025.
Prasojo, Bintoro, and Jatmiko Wirawan. “Survei KY: Tunjangan Hakim Tidak Sepadan Dengan Beban Kerja,” September 30, 2025. https://dandapala.com/article/detail/survei-ky-tunjangan-hakim-tidak-sepadan-dengan-beban-kerja, accessed on July 21, 2025.
Thomaidou, Mia A., Colleen M. Berryessa, and Sandy S. Xie. “A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Judges’ Views and Decision-Making Surrounding Scientific Evidence in Criminal Sentencing,” Research Square, June 2024. https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4536242/v1/33c8c2a8-54d5-472c-860c-f5ecb98d84d5.pdf, accessed on July 23, 2025.
Report:
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). European Judicial Systems: CEPEJ Evaluation Report – 2024 (2022 Data). Part 1: General Analyses. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2024.
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). European Judicial Systems: CEPEJ Evaluation Report 2022 (Cycle 2020). Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2022.
Government Regulation No. 44 of 2024 on Judicial Salaries (2024).
Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR). “Reformasi Pelatihan Hakim Dan Advokat di Indonesia: Evaluasi Kebutuhan Dan Strategi,” 2021.
International Commission of Jurists. “The Bangalore Principles.” Group 2002 (2002): 1–11.
Komisi Yudisial. “Laporan Tahunan 2023-2024.” Jakarta, 2024.
Komisi Yudisial. “Survey Independensi Hakim di Indonesia.” Jakarta, 2023.
OECD. Enhancing Judicial Performance through Financial and Ethical Instruments. OECD Publishing, 2020.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Access to Justice and Legal Aid in East Asia. Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2020.
United Nations. Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary (1985). https://peacemaker.un.org/en/documents/basic-principles-independence-judiciary.
World Bank. Strengthening Judicial Systems in Indonesia: Institutional Review Report. Washington, DC: The World Bank Group, 2020.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.26532/ijlr.v9i2.47828
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
International Journal of Law Reconstruction Indexed by :
 | International Journal of Law Recnstruction | |
| Faculty of Law, Unissula | Copyright of International Journal of Law Reconstruction | |
| Jalan Kaligawe Raya KM.4, Terboyo Kulon, Genuk, | E-ISSN 2580-9245 (Online) | |
| Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia, 50112 | IJLR is licensed under a |