Between Gratitude and Constitutional Abuse: Criticism of Amnesty/Abolition Recipients' Lawsuits Against Judges

The application of this principle also strengthens constitutional morality (Bickel, 1962), namely the awareness that political and legal actions must uphold the spirit of the constitution. In the Indonesian context, that spirit is the spirit of mutual cooperation and respect for the integrity of state institutions. Without this awareness, democracy will become trapped in a shallow tactical game, where power becomes an arena for egocentrism, not a vehicle for devotion.

Thus, criticism of abolition recipients who sue judges is not merely a matter of legality, but also a matter of political morality and morality. Such actions reflect a disconnect between personal interests and a mystical sense of nationalism. If you feel you are in the right and innocent, return the abolition and continue the legal fight as a form of devotion to the nation and justice.

Pancasila democracy requires leadership that is not only technocratically astute but also spiritually and politically mature. Such leaders understand that power is not a private right, but rather a trust that must be safeguarded with loyalty to national ideals. Politicians who operate solely on individualistic logic are incompatible with this system, as they will tend to fragment national solidarity for short-term gain.

Loyalty to the mystical ideals of nationalism means placing national unity above ego, the nobility of law above tactical interests, and the honor of the nation above all personal ambitions. In this way, the President's prerogative remains a symbol of wisdom, the judiciary remains steadfast as the guardian of justice, and Pancasila democracy continues to pulsate as the soul of the nation.

-------------------

Reference:

• Asshiddiqie, J. (2010). Pengantar Hukum Tata Negara. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
• Bickel, A. M. (1962). The Least Dangerous Branch. New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Dworkin, R. (1986). Law's Empire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Friedmann, W. (1990). Legal Theory (5th ed.). London: Stevens & Sons.
• Habermas, J. (1996). Between Facts and Norms. Cambridge: MIT Press.
• Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945
• Undang-Undang Darurat Nomor 11 Tahun 1954 tentang Amnesti dan Abolisi. Lembaran Negara RI Tahun 1954 Nomor 7.
• Mertokusumo, S. (2009). Hukum Acara Perdata Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Liberty.
• Ruiter, D.W.P. (2001). Legal Institutions. Dordrecht: Springer.
• Montesquieu. (1989). The Spirit of Laws (A. Cohler, C. Miller, & H. Stone, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1748)
• Marzuki, P.M. (2017). Pengantar Ilmu Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana.
• Notonagoro. (1975). Pancasila: Dasar Falsafah Negara. Jakarta: Pantjuran Tujuh.
• Sunstein, C. (1996). Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  Thompson, D.F. (1987). Political Ethics and Public Office. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Kaelan. (2010). Pendidikan Pancasila. Yogyakarta: Paradigma.
• Machiavelli, N. (1998). The Prince (Q. Skinner & R. Price, Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1532)
• Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Rousseau, J. J. (1994). The Social Contract. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1762).
• Savigny, F. C. von. (1979). Of the Vocation of Our Age for Legislation and Jurisprudence. New York: Arno Press. (Original work published 1840)
• Soekarno. (1960). Di Bawah Bendera Revolusi (Jilid I). Jakarta: Panitia Penerbit DBR.