HUKUM PROGRESIF SEBAGAI RESPONS TERHADAP POSITIVISME DIGITAL: MEMBACA ULANG PEMIKIRAN SATJIPTO RAHARDJO DI ERA SOCIETY 5.0
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24252/iqtishaduna.v7i4.70808Abstrak
Abstrak
Artikel ini mengkaji relevansi hukum progresif sebagaimana digagas oleh Satjipto Rahardjo sebagai kerangka kritis untuk merespons kecenderungan positivisme digital yang muncul seiring transformasi hukum menuju era Society 5.0. Positivisme digital dipahami sebagai wajah baru positivisme hukum yang mereproduksi logika legalistik-formalistik lama ke dalam bentuk algoritma, kode, dan sistem otomatisasi pengambilan keputusan hukum yang bersifat tertutup dan berpotensi mereduksi keadilan substantif menjadi sekadar kepatuhan prosedural terhadap keluaran komputasi. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif melalui pendekatan konseptual dan pendekatan kasus, artikel ini menemukan bahwa gagasan inti hukum progresif, yakni “hukum untuk manusia, bukan manusia untuk hukum”, tetap relevan sebagai basis filosofis untuk mengoreksi kecenderungan tersebut. Kajian atas praktik digitalisasi peradilan di Indonesia, seperti pemanfaatan kecerdasan buatan dalam manajemen perkara di Mahkamah Agung, fenomena trial by social media, serta perbandingan dengan praktik algoritmik di berbagai yurisdiksi, menunjukkan perlunya prinsip human-in-command dan interpretasi kontekstual-teleologis agar teknologi tidak menggantikan nurani hukum. Artikel ini merekomendasikan pengarusutamaan nilai-nilai hukum progresif ke dalam desain kebijakan tata kelola teknologi hukum, penguatan transparansi dan akuntabilitas algoritma, serta reformulasi pendidikan hukum agar aktor hukum di era Society 5.0 tetap memiliki keberanian interpretatif untuk keluar dari kungkungan logika sistem yang tertutup, baik yang berwujud teks maupun kode.
Kata Kunci: Hukum Progresif; Positivisme Digital; Society 5.0; Kecerdasan Buatan
Abstract
This article examines the relevance of Satjipto Rahardjo’s progressive law as a critical framework for responding to the emergence of digital positivism amid the legal transformation toward the Society 5.0 era. Digital positivism is understood as a new manifestation of legal positivism that reproduces the old legalistic-formalistic logic through algorithms, code, and automated legal decision-making systems that are closed in nature and risk reducing substantive justice to mere procedural compliance with computational output. Using normative legal research through conceptual and case-based approaches, this article finds that the core idea of progressive law, that “law exists for humans, not humans for law”, remains relevant as a philosophical basis for correcting this tendency. An examination of judicial digitalization practices in Indonesia, including the use of artificial intelligence in Supreme Court case management, the phenomenon of trial by social media, and comparative algorithmic practices from other jurisdictions, indicates the need for a human-in-command principle and contextual-teleological interpretation so that technology does not supplant legal conscience. This article recommends mainstreaming progressive law values into legal-technology governance design, strengthening algorithmic transparency and accountability, and reforming legal education so that legal actors in the Society 5.0 era retain the interpretive courage to break free from the confines of closed systemic logic, whether textual or algorithmic.
Keywords: Progressive Law; Digital Positivism; Society 5.0;Artificial Intelligence
Unduhan
Diterbitkan
Terbitan
Bagian
Lisensi
Hak Cipta (c) 2026 Saiful, Khairul Hadi, Mira Nila Kusuma Dewi, Dian Mandala Putra, Ihsan

Artikel ini berlisensi Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Once an article was published in the journal, the author(s) are:
- to retain copyright and grant to the journal right licensed under Creative Commons License Attribution that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship.
- permitted to publish their work online in third parties as it can lead wider dissemination of the work, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal
- continue to be the copyright owner and allow the journal to publish the article with the CC BY-NC-SA license
- receiving a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) of the work.





