How are Indonesian Judges' Attitudes Towards Women Reflected Through Their Judicial Discourse and Decision-Making?

Abstract

This thesis examines gender and judging in Indonesian criminal courts, addressing the overarching question: "How are judicial attitudes to women reflected in judicial discourse and decision-making in Indonesian criminal courts?" Challenging a formalistic view of law application, the study investigates how factors beyond formal legal statutes, including judges' habitus, emotions, societal and cultural values, and institutional pressures, shape judicial outcomes. The research employs a qualitative socio-legal approach drawing on multiple theoretical frameworks, including legal culture, legal pluralism, theory of practice, and an emotive cognitive judicial framework. Methodology involved the analysis of 462 court decisions across three crime types: rape, adultery, and narcotics cases, 82 interviews with judges, prosecutors, and legal service providers, and 81 courtroom session observations. Findings reveal distinct, subtle, yet complex patterns across case types, demonstrating that gender influences judicial reasoning and outcomes. In rape cases, courts often adhere to rigid technical requirements through the doctrine of "material truth," potentially re-traumatising victims. Adultery cases often reflect moral evaluations shaped by traditional gender roles, while narcotics cases show selective leniency, which may fade in large-scale offences. The analysis shows varying sentencing patterns, influenced by factors such as case-specific circumstances and judges' expectations of appropriate conduct based on legal and social-religious standards. Furthermore, findings reveal differences in the emotive language used towards women compared to men. The study concludes that judicial decision-making is not merely a technical application of law, but a deeply human practice embedded in its specific contexts. This human practice, influenced by emotive cognitive processes within specific cultural and institutional contexts, demonstrates that Indonesia's criminal courts are both similar to those in other jurisdictions and unique. It challenges assumptions about Indonesian judges as simply mouthpieces of the law, arguing that they act as intermediaries navigating multiple normative orders and tensions. This complex navigation represents judges' practical wisdom in balancing competing demands rather than simple rule application. Implications emphasise the need for systemic changes. Key recommendations include enhancing judicial training focused on unconscious bias and emotion management. Improving information flow to judges about women's realities and fostering collaboration between courts, legal actors, universities, and civil society organisations are important actionable steps. This research makes an original contribution by providing an in-depth law-in-context analysis of the Indonesian judiciary through multiple lenses, ultimately strengthening efforts to bridge the gap between formal law and women's lived realities and promote more equitable justice delivery. Show more