Salah satu tokoh yang saya kagumi pemikiran dan dedikasinya adalah Profesor Hukum Rakyat, Soetandyo Wignyosoebroto. Beliau mengajarkan banyak hal sejak saya bekerja sebagai pengabdi bantuan hukum di LBH Surabaya, hingga akhirnya menjadi asisten beliau mengelola mata kuliah Hukum dan Masyarakat di Program Pascasarjana, Universitas Airlangga, dan Sosiologi Hukum di Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pelita Harapan Surabaya, 2011-2013.
Dalam tulisan ‘Menuju Republik Indonesia’, Tan mengawali pemikiran imajinatif ketatanegaraan, yang jelas begitu punya pengaruh atas pemikiran hukum dan politik pada masa itu, hingga terbentuknya negara Republik Indonesia. Mengapa Tan Malaka sosok penting dalam menggagas nama ‘Republik Indonesia’? Mengapa ia berpengaruh, namun tokoh misterius? 1963 dikukuhkan sebagai Pahlawan Nasional, tapi ia dilenyapkan dalam pendidikan sejarah. Simak wawancara dengan Harry A Poeze (peneliti senior KITLV Leiden) yang telah 40 tahun lebih mendedikasikan waktu dan energinya membuka misteri soal Tan Malaka.
Lectures via Video
Professor Walden Bello merupakan guru sekaligus teman diskusi yang sangat inspiratif. Saat menempuh studi Master bidang Hak Asasi Manusia, sungguh beruntung dibimbing dalam menuliskan thesis yang akhirnya diterbitkan setahun setelah selesai studi (2007). Sekalipun mengaku sulit membagi waktu untuk membimbing, karena ia membimbing mahasiswa master dan doktoral di 15 kampus di berbagai negara, namun faktanya selalu bisa membuat pertemuan, proses diskusi menjadi lebih bermakna, panjang dan sangat efektif. Sayang ia tak bisa dampingi saat saya hadapi ujian master, karena ia harus bertolak ke Libanon untuk kampanye perdamaian dan perlindungan hak asasi manusia melawan gempuran Israel ke negara tersebut (Agustus 2006).
Dr (Hon) Susan George [“Outstanding Public Scholar Award” of the International Political Economy] on ‘Transforming the Global Economy’
Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn [Professor of Constitutional Law and Human Rights] on Human Rights Practices in Asia and Africa
Professor Upendra Baxi [Professor of Comparative Constitutional Law and Human Rights] on Legal Education, Social Science and Research Method. Prof Baxi said that the task for law school is to promote social justice. Hence, he said that social elements in legal education is important, and the purpose is to transform the landscape of teaching, research and legal thinking. He coined the ‘social science based understanding of law‘, which is also necessary to apply ‘social science legal research method’ for law schools.
Professor Martha Nussbaum [the Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at School of Law, the University of Chicago] on Not to Profit: Why Legal Education Needs Humanities?, 2011, Lecture at UNSW Law School, Australia. She argued that legal education needs progressive educators, who facilitate active critical thinkings, not only defeating other arguments, but stronger reasons. Not as monopoly of legal profession and clever reason, but the challenge is how to pursue social justice! … She routinely teaches ‘feminist philosophy’ and ‘theory of social justice’. She says that law school cannot isolate themselves, it should make an interdisciplinary cooperation and strong partnership between law schools and humanities departments.
Professor Roberto Mangabeira Unger [Professor of Law, Harvard Law School, well know as ‘progressive-alternative’] on The Next Revolution in Legal Education, 24 March 2012. In globalised context requires radical orientation of what law school do. He claimed there is almost no relation between what the goals at law school around the world and the actual function that they performed in their society. The essence of my program is for the real direction of legal education is to exploit in comparative advantage of law as the site where the interests and ideals meet on institutions and practices. Law schools should provide a transformative imagination. Legal profession in narrow sense is only a small fragment of the range of activities of the two things of law: to teach people, research, argument, drafting, and negotiation, in at least three sets of context, 1. representation of judicative; 2. the design of transaction, which is most of the actual activities of the lead bar without any special relation to judicative set; 3. the redesign institution in the course activities of representing and reinterpreting interests of particular groups in the society. The curriculum on non-legal discipline that should be informed both understanding of law and the practice of law. Now we are all know that the distinctive content of law has been increasingly held on up. And the contemporary legal thought increasingly attempts to import all other disciplines. And the problem is they have no structural imagination. The challenge is to provide the new space for law school, a terrain of contestation, of subversion, of transformation, of the methodological orthodoxies in the established social disciplines.
Dr. Adriaan Bedner [Senior Lecturer at the Van Vollenhoven Institute, Faculty of Law, Leiden University] on Indonesian Legal Scholarship and Jurisprudence as an Obstacle for Transplanting Legal Institutions. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, Vol. 5/Issue 02/September 2013, pp. 253-273. Theory on legal transplants makes a distinction between reception in law and reception in society. Both topics generate their own debates: the former are concerned with the question how the deeper lying legal epistemological structures shape the way in which transplanted rules and institutions acquire new meaning, the latter with how such rules work out on the social processes they ought to regulate. Usually the cases chosen for looking at the legal side are from well-developed legal systems, whereas those about developing countries focus on the social effectiveness. This ignores that many such systems in the world — including in Asia — are fragmented, unevenly developed, and unlikely to be capable of effectively appropriating and reconstructing new rules. The present article takes Indonesia as an example to show how structural problems of legal systems in countries adopting legal transplants may prevent legal rules and institutions from being accommodated into them. The article argues that this resistance can be explained only in part from factors such as governmental fragmentation, corruption, malfunctioning of the political system, or a legal plural colonial heritage, and that they are inherent in the state of legal scholarship and jurisprudence. In Indonesia these are incapable of producing the coherent legal theories required for effective reception of foreign law and legal institutions, a situation likely to be found in many countries. Given the structural factors underpinning this state of legal scholarship and jurisprudence, change will be very difficult to effect and the rule of law is an ideal that remains far away.
Professor Vedi R. Hadiz [Professor of Asian Societies and Politics] on Old Legacies and New Promises: Indonesia Decides
DIGEST Epistema Edisi Metode Penelitian Sosio-Legal, Vol. 3, 2013. Filsafat Penelitian Hukum (Dr. Shidarta) – Penelitian Sosial Berobjek Hukum (Prof Soetandyo Wingyosoebroto) – Metode Penelitian Sosial/Non-Doktrinal untuk Mengkaji Hukum dalam Konsepnya sebagai Realitas Sosial (Prof Soetandyo Wingyosoebroto) – Metode, Teori dan Ideologi dalam Studi Perempuan Interdisiplin terhadap Hukum (Donny Danardono, MA.) – Good Governance dan Pembaruan Hukum di Indonesia: Refleksi Penelitian Sosio-Legal (Dr. Herlambang P. Wiratraman) – Menjadikan Penelitian Sosio-Legal Bermakna bagi Kebijakan Tenurial Kehutanan (Dr. Myrna A Safitri) – Penelitian Socio-Legal dalam Studi Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Alam (Dr. Rikardo Simarmata).