Abstract:
Since colonial times and up to the present, law’s scientific character has been questioned by non-legal scholars and legal scholars alike. Currently, the same doubts arise as the general public questions the feasibility of Indonesian legal scholars’
solutions to various social-economic-political problems. This paper tackles the big question of how we should evaluate and validate the scientific character of Indonesian legal science as taught and researched by Indonesian legal scholars. In 1942, Paul Scholten, who was a prominent figure at the Rechtshogeschool at Batavia, argued that law was a scientific endeavor on par with other scientific fields. More than a few decades later, B. Arief Sidharta, Sidharta and Anthon F. Susanto, legal scholars working in post-colonial Indonesia, have taken up the same challenge and defended the view that law is worthy of the name ‘science’. This article traces the views and arguments of these three legal scholars and argues that legal scholars offering legal opinions to social-political-economic problems should be able to justify their views, using recognized and verifiable legal method.
Description:
The paper is presented in a Workshop on New Perspectives on Law and Reality, organized by the Digital Paul Scholten Project (DPSP) at the University of Amsterdam (UvA), as part of the Third Paul Scholten Symposium on 26th of November 2015.
