•  
  •  
 

DOI

10.21143/jhp.vol56.no.2.1985

Abstract

The Indonesian rule of law emphasizes that law should not be understood merely in a legal-formal sense, but also in its moral and social dimensions. This study stems from the persistent tension between legal certainty and justice and the need for an interpretative method capable of bridging the two. The main objective of this research is to examine and formulate a model of tiered legal interpretation that integrates four approaches derived from the common law tradition—Literal Interpretation (LI), Golden Rule (GR), Mischief Rule (MR), and Purposive Approach (PA)—into the Indonesian legal system. This model has been contextually applied in jurisdictions such as India, the United Kingdom, and the United States to balance statutory texts with underlying values of justice. The study reveals that tiered interpretation provides judges with a methodological framework to interpret law contextually and value-oriented, beginning from the grammatical meaning of a norm to the normative purpose of the legislature. Findings also show that similar practices have emerged in Indonesia, as reflected in the Constitutional Court Decision No. 46/PUU-VIII/2010, despite the absence of an explicitly institutionalized model. In conclusion, this approach aligns with the constitutional mandate and the foundational character of Pancasila-based law and proves to be a relevant response to the challenges of legal interpretation amidst social pluralism and the evolving nature of modern law.

Bahasa Abstract

Negara hukum Indonesia menekankan pentingnya hukum yang saja dimaknai secara legal-formal, tetapi juga secara moral dan sosial. Penelitian ini berangkat dari ketegangan antara kepastian hukum dan keadilan, serta perlunya metode interpretasi hukum yang mampu menjembatani keduanya. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mengkaji dan merumuskan model penafsiran hukum bertingkat yang mengintegrasikan empat pendekatan dari tradisi common law—Literal Interpretation (LI), Golden Rule (GR), Mischief Rule (MR), dan Purposive Approach (PA)—ke dalam sistem hukum Indonesia. Model ini telah diterapkan secara di negara-negara seperti India, Inggris, dan Amerika Serikat untuk menyeimbangkan antara teks hukum dan nilai-nilai keadilan. Penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa model penafsiran bertingkat memberi hakim ruang metodologis untuk menafsirkan hukum secara kontekstual dan berorientasi pada nilai, dimulai dari makna gramatikal hingga tujuan normatif pembentuk undang-undang. Temuan juga menunjukkan bahwa praktik serupa telah muncul salah satunya dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 46/PUU-VIII/2010, meskipun belum ada konsep penafsiran bertingkat secara eksplisit. Kesimpulannya, pendekatan ini selaras dengan amanat konstitusi dan karakter hukum Pancasila, serta relevan sebagai jawaban atas tantangan interpretasi hukum yang kompleks di tengah pluralisme sosial dan dinamika hukum modern.

References

Agrawal, Aishwarya. “Golden Rule of Interpretation of Statutes.” LawBhoomi, 2023. https://lawbhoomi.com/golden-rule-of-interpretation-of-statutes/.

Ambreen Aslam. “Foundational Rules of Interpretation of Statute.” International Journal of Social Science & Entrepreneurship 3, no. 1 (2023). doi:10.58661/ijsse.v3i1.115.

Amir, Mutaman. “Principles of Statutory Interpretation.” Available at SSRN 3832524, 2021. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3832524.

Amisha. “Explained: Literal Rule of Interpretation.” Lexforti, 2021. https://lexforti.com/legal-news/explained-literal-rule-of-interpretation/.

Arfi Hilmiati, dan Kartika Yusrina. “DAMPAK PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NO. 46/PUUVIII/2010 TERHADAP HUKUM PERKAWINAN DI INDONESIA.” Mawaddah: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam 1, no. 1 (2024). doi:10.52496/mjhki.v1i1.3.

AWANA, VIJAY. “Jurisprudential Aspects and Significance of Rule of Purposive Interpretation.” International Journal of Legal Science and Innovation 2, no. 2 (2020): 46–54. file:///C:/Users/Erwin Susilo/Downloads/Jurisprudential-Aspects-and-Significance-of-Rule-of-Purposive-Interpretation.pdf.

Barwicka-Tylek, Iwona, dan Anna Ceglarska. “Does la bouche de la loi Have Anything to Say in Democracy? An Exercise in Legal Imagination.” Studia Iuridica Lublinensia 31, no. 2 (2022). doi:10.17951/sil.2022.31.2.85-99.

Bray, Samuel L. “The Mischief Rule” 109 (2021): 967–1013. https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/glj109§ion=32.

Chairul Lutfi, Muhammad Ali Hanafiah Selian. “Penemuan dan Penafsiran Hukum Hakim Mahkamah Agung Tentang Penyelesaian Sengketa Pembiayaan Akad Musyarakah.” Syar’ie: Jurnal Pemikiran … 4, no. 1 (2021).

Chowdhury, Md Multazim Sidrat. “Tools of Statutory Interpretation and Position of Legislative History: A Comparative Study between USA and Bangladesh,” 2025. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.19569.60000.

Ciravegna, Monia. “Ubi Societas, Ibi Ius: The Legal System.” In Damanhur, 2023. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-10137-3_4.

Dewanto, Pandu. “Rekonstruksi Pertimbangan Hakim Terhadap Putusan Sengketa Perdata Berbasis Nilai Keadilan.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 5, no. 2 (2020). doi:10.26623/jic.v5i2.2307.

E-lawresources. “R v Harris (1836) 7 C & P 446,” 2025. https://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/r-v-harris-1836#google_vignette.

Emudainohwo, E. “The importance of an industrial court in the interpretation of labour statutes.” Commonwealth Law Bulletin 46, no. 2 (2020). doi:10.1080/03050718.2020.1781675.

Escher, Ana. “The Concept of Open Texture in ‘The Concept of Law.’” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2023. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4530348.

Fungwacharakorn, Wachara, dan Ken Satoh. “Toward a practical legal rule revision in legal debugging.” Computer Law and Security Review 46 (2022). doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105696.

Green, Jonathan. “The Misunderstood History of Interpretation in England.” Ariz. St. LJ 56 (2024): 911. https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/arzjl56§ion=22.

Haryono, Dodi. “Metode Tafsir Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Pengujian Konstitusional Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja.” Jurnal Konstitusi 18, no. 4 (2022). doi:10.31078/jk1843.

Hiebaum, Christian. “Law as Weak Integrity.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2023. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4441791.

Ibrahim, Usman, dan Zainab Akinde. “Purposive Approach to Statutory Interpretation: Comparative Analysis and Impact on Nigerian Legislative Drafting.” Journal of Commercial and Property Law 11, no. December 2023 (2024): 49–62. https://journals.unizik.edu.ng/jcpl/article/download/3574/2894.

Jackson, Nicola. “Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394; [1960] 3 WLR 919.” In Essential Cases: Contract Law 5e, 2022. doi:10.1093/he/9780191948886.003.0007.

Johannes Agustinus Riady, dan Abdul Ficar Hadjar. “PENAFSIRAN HUKUM HAKIM YANG DIGUNAKAN DALAM MEMUTUS PERKARA KORUPSI BANSOS JULIARI BATUBARA.” Reformasi Hukum Trisakti 6, no. 1 (2024). doi:10.25105/refor.v6i1.19202.

Kanantha, Adiel Muhammad, dan Ferry Edwar. “INDEPENDENSI PENGADILAN PAJAK DITINJAU DARI PASAL 24 AYAT (1) UUD NRI 1945.” Reformasi Hukum Trisakti 4, no. 3 (2022). doi:10.25105/refor.v4i3.13828.

Kanoon. “Mischief Rule,” 2025. https://indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=mischief rule+doctypes:supremecourt.

Karima, Aliya, Nabila Luthvia Rahma, Abdurrohman Kasdi, dan Labib Nubahai. “KEPENTINGAN TERBAIK ANAK PEMOHON DISPENSASI PERNIKAHAN DALAM PENAFSIRAN HUKUM OLEH HAKIM.” Al-Syakhsiyyah: Journal of Law & Family Studies 5, no. 2 (2023). doi:10.21154/syakhsiyyah.v5i2.7082.

Kurniawan, Muhamad Beni, dan Dinora Refiasari. “PENAFSIRAN MAKNA ‘ALASAN SANGAT MENDESAK’ DALAM PENOLAKAN PERMOHONAN DISPENSASI KAWIN.” Jurnal Yudisial 15, no. 1 (2022). doi:10.29123/jy.v15i1.508.

Law, Edzorb. “Principles of Statutory Interpretation in Law?: Key Rules & Landmark Cases,” 2023. https://edzorblaw.com/2024/09/06/blog-principles-of-statutory-interpretation-key-concepts-and-case-law/.

LawBhoomi. “Literal Rule of Interpretation,” 2025. https://lawbhoomi.com/literal-rule-of-interpretation/.

———. “Mischief Rule of Interpretation of Statutes,” 2024. https://lawbhoomi.com/mischief-rule-of-interpretation-of-statutes/.

Lawteacher. “Approaches for Determining the Meaning of a Statute,” 2025. https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/english-legal-system/applications-of-the-literal-golden-and-mischief-rule.php.

Learn, Open. “3.3 The mischief rule.” The Open University, 2025. https://www.open.edu/openlearn/mod/oucontent/view.php?id=68342§ion=3.3.

Mandal, Sakshi. “CANONS OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION,” 2019. https://www.academia.edu/download/63276189/Canons_of_Statutory_Interpretation-_pdf-converted20200511-51545-m54e5k.pdf.

McCormack, Shannon Weeks. “Tax shelters and statutory interpretation: A much needed purposive approach.” University of Illinois Law Review, 2009.

Millis, Spencer. “Purposive Approach to Charter Interpretation.” Centre for Constitutional Studies, 2020. https://www.constitutionalstudies.ca/2020/07/purposive-approach-to-charter-interpretation/.

Musa, M., July Wiarti, dan Endri Endri. “Matinya Rule Breaking : Postulat Penalaran Hakim dalam Memutus Bebas Perbuatan Cabul (Kajian Putusan Bebas Perkara No.46/Pid.B/2022/PN Pbr).” Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia 5, no. 2 (2023). doi:10.14710/jphi.v5i2.285-306.

Nedzel, Nadia Elizabeth. “Fuller, Dworkin, Scientism, and Liberty: The Dichotomy between Continental and Common Law Traditions and Their Consequences.” Laws 12, no. 3 (2023). doi:10.3390/laws12030037.

Palsikar, Abhinav. “Critical Analysis of Literal Rule of Interpretation.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3720368.

Pauer-Studer, Herlinde. “Symposium on Justifying Injustice. Legal Theory in Nazi Germany (CUP 2020): responses to critics.” Jurisprudence, 2023. doi:10.1080/20403313.2023.2204691.

Pech, Laurent. “The Rule of Law as a Well-Established and Well-Defined Principle of EU Law.” Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 14, no. 2–3 (2022). doi:10.1007/s40803-022-00176-8.

Puspito, Beni, dan Ali Masyhar. “Dynamics of Legality Principles in Indonesian National Criminal Law Reform.” Journal of Law and Legal Reform 4, no. 1 (2023). doi:10.15294/jllr.v4i1.64078.

Rabault, Hugues. “‘Global Bukovina’: Gunther Teubner’s Homage to Eugen Ehrlich.” Zeitschrift fur Rechtssoziologie 44, no. 1 (2024): 48–66. doi:10.1515/zfrs-2024-1005.

Rath, Sambit. “Golden Rule of Interpretation.” Ipleaders, 2022. https://blog.ipleaders.in/golden-rule-of-interpretation/.

Raza, Aqa. “Doctrine of Basic Structure: A Critique.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3715099.

Razi, Naseem. “A comparative study of maṣlaḥah and mischief rule: Pakistani perspective.” Journal of Islamic Thought and Civilization 11, no. 1 (2021). doi:10.32350/JITC.111.18.

Re, Richard M. “Permissive Interpretation.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2022. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4184846.

Salam, Abdul, Rusdin Muhalling, dan Abdul Gaffar. “Analisis Yuridis Pertimbangan Penetapan Hakim dalam Perkara Dispensasi Kawin Atas Dasar Mendesak.” KALOSARA: Family Law Review 2, no. 2 (2022). doi:10.31332/kalosara.v2i2.4264.

Sarda, Mukund. “Police Preliminary Inquiry and Recording of First Information Report: A Study in the Light of Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh [AIR 2012 SC 1515].” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2016. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2713636.

Shatagar, Anusha Sanjeevkumar. “THE ROLE OF THE MISCHIEF RULE IN RESOLVING AMBIGUITIES IN LAWS.” THE LAWWAY WITH LAWYERS JOURNAL 17, no. 17 (2024): 1–9. https://thelawwaywithlawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Anusha.101-Anusha-Shatagar.docx.pdf.

Siswoyo, Dwi. “Philosophy of education in Indonesia: Theory and thoughts of institutionalized state (Pancasila).” Asian Social Science 9, no. 12 SPL ISSUE (2013). doi:10.5539/ass.v9n12p136.

Soepandji, Kris Wijoyo, dan Muhammad Farid. “KONSEP BELA NEGARA DALAM PERSPEKTIF KETAHANAN NASIONAL.” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 48, no. 3 (2018). doi:10.21143/jhp.vol48.no3.1741.

Sudarmanto, Kukuh. “HUKUM ADMINISTRASI DAN SISTEM PERADILAN DI INDONESIA YANG BERKEADILAN SESUAI ASAS-ASAS PANCASILA.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 6, no. 2 (2021). doi:10.26623/jic.v6i2.4110.

Sunstein, Cass R. “There Are Two ‘Major Question’ Doctrines.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3724642.

Tan, Seow Hon. “Radbruch’s Formula Revisited: The Lex Injusta Non Est Lex Maxim in Constitutional Democracies.” Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 34, no. 2 (2021). doi:10.1017/cjlj.2021.12.

Teguh Prasetyo. Keadilan Bermartabat Perspektif Teori hukum. Bandung: Nusamedia, 2019.

Tunley, Alison. “The purposive approach to interpreting legal meaning,” 2022. https://www.rosettatranslation.com/the-purposive-approach/.

Tutor, Law. “Golden Rule,” 2023. https://lawtutor.co.uk/golden-rule.

Valentine, Viony Laurel, Andika Putra Eskanugraha, I Ketut Wiweka Ari Purnawan, dan Ratri Sumilir Budi Sasanti. “Penafsiran Keadaan Tertentu Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi: Perspektif Teori Kepastian Hukum.” JURNAL ANTI KORUPSI 13, no. 1 (2023). doi:10.19184/jak.v13i1.40004.

Vinx, Lars. “Pauer-Studer and Radbruch’s second thesis.” Jurisprudence, 2023. doi:10.1080/20403313.2023.2204689.

Wahyudhi, Tsabitha Afnan Putri, dan Beniharmoni Harefa. “Penentuan Status Korban Pemerkosaan Guna Melakukan Aborsi Pasca Pengesahan Undang-undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2023.” JURNAL MERCATORIA 16, no. 1 (2023). doi:10.31289/mercatoria.v16i1.9439.

WJEC. “Statutory Interpretation,” 2020. https://resource.download.wjec.co.uk/vtc/2020-21/ko20-21_1-8a/pdf/_eng/statutory-interpretation.pdf.

Zeifert, Mateusz. “Rethinking Hart: From Open Texture to Prototype Theory—Analytic Philosophy Meets Cognitive Linguistics.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 35, no. 2 (2022). doi:10.1007/s11196-020-09722-9.

Download

Share

COinS