Pragmatic and Progressive Legal Practice: Ethnographic Case Study of Jatigede Reservoir

Teddy Asmara


This study reveals the legal method in the process of land compensation in the Jatigede reservoir, and focuses on: the existence and application of pragmatic law by rural farming communities; and the government's use of progressive law. By using a combination of case study and micro-ethnographic methods, the answers are obtained, first, the pragmatic legal character is relatively in line with speculative cognition and defensive principles; its adaptive application is to resist the law silently, and the aggressive one is to violate the law openly. Second, the government understands the manipulation of compensation as a reflection of the accumulated injustice and economic difficulties of the citizens, therefore the government makes regulations that prioritize the restoration of people's welfare rather than fulfilling the requirements of legal logic.

Keywords: people's welfare; speculative cognition; compensation manipulation; defensive principle; ethnographic-case study

Full Text:

PDF View


Argyrou, A. (2017). Making the Case for Case Studies in Empirical Legal Research. Utrecht Law Review. 13 (3). 95-113. Retrivied January 10, 2019, from

Asmara, T. (2012). Proses legitimiasi HMT di Pengadilan Tipikor Amarta. Jurnal Dinamika Hukum. 12(3). 379-394.

Barzun, C.L. (2018). Three forms of Legal Paragmatism. Washinton University Law Review. 95 (5). 1003-1034. Retrieved September 18, 2020, from

Bens, J and Larissa Vetter.(2018). Ethnographic legal studies: reconnecting anthropological and sosiological traditions. The Journal of Legal Plularism and Unofficial Law. 50 (3). 239-254. Retrieved December 4, 2019, from DOI: 10.1080/07329113.2018.1559487.

Boulanger, C.(2020). The Comparative Sociology of Legal Doctrine: Thoughts on a Research Program. German Law Journal. 21 (7). 1362–1377. Retrivied January 10, 2021, from

Cantu, E.(2012).Posner’s pragmatism and the turn toward fidelity. Lewis & Clark Law Review. 16 (1). 69-123. Retrieved October 24, 2020, from

Cohen, A.J. (2009). Thinking with Culture in Law and Development. Buffalo Law Review. 57 (2). 511-586. Retrieved February 26, 2011, from

Creswell, J. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quatitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.Inc.

Creutzfeldt, N, Agnieszka Kubal and Fernanda Pirie. (2016). Introduction: exploring in the comparative socio-legal studies. International Journal of Law in Context. 12 (4). 377-389 Retrieved January 16, 2019, from

Detik News. (2012). Kasus Korupsi Proyek Waduk Jati Gede Sumedang Segera Disidang. Retrieved September 6, 2020, from

Dewi, I.G.S. (2017). Konflik tentang Ganti Rugi Non Fisik pada Pengadaan Tanah untuk Kepentingan Umum. Masalah-Masalah Hukum. 46 (3). 282-290.

Ferreira, C.M and Sandro Serpa (2019). Rationalization and Bureaucracy: Ideal-Type Bureaucracy by Max Weber. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews. 7 (2). 187-195. Retrieved October 10, 2020, from

Fusch, P and Gene E. Fusch, (2017). How to a Mini-ethnographic Case Study: Guides for Novie Researchers. The Qualitative Report. 22. (3). 923-941. Retrieved October, 15, 2020, from

Galavotti, M.C.(2019). Pragmatism and the Birth of Subjective Probability.European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy.XI-1. Retrieved January 7,2021, from DOI: 10.4000/ejpap.1509.

Garth, B and Elizabeth Mertz.(2016). Introduction: New Legal Realism at Ten Years and Beyond. UC Irvin Law Review. 16. 121-136. Retrieved September 28, 2020, from

Haack, S.(2018). The Pragmatist Tradition: Lesson for Legal Theorists. Washington University Law Review. 95. 1049-1082. Retrieved September 28, 2020, from

Koran Tempo. (2006). Warga Sumedang Gugat Pemerintah. Retrieved September 6, 2020, from

Kotalewala, F, Adonia Ivone Laturette dan Novyta Uktolseja. (2020). Penyelesaian Sengketa dalam Pengadaan Tanah Bagi Pembangunan Jalan untuk Kepentingan Umum. SASI. 26 (3) 415-433. Retrieved November 2, 2020, from DOI:

Leeuw, F.L. (2017). American Legal Realism: Research Programme and Policy Impact. Utrecht Law Review. 13 (3). 28-40. Retrieved October 10, 2020, from

Lind, D.(2012). The mismeasurement of legal pragmatism. Washinton University legal Review. 4(2). 213-268. Retrieved October, 10, 2020, from

Macaulay, Stewart and Elizabeth Mertz.(2013). New Legal Realism and the Empirical Turn in Law. in Banakar, Reza and Max Travers (eds). Law and Social Theory. 2nd ed. Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing. 195-210.

Mapuasari, S.A dan Hadi Mahmudah. (2018). Korupsi Berjamaah: Konsensus Sosial atas Gratifikasi dan Suap. Integritas-Jurnal Antikorupsi. 4 (2).159-175. Retrieved September 20, 2020, from

Mautner, M. (2011). Three Aproaches to Law and Culture. Cornell Law Review. 96 (4). 839-868. Retrieved October 8, 2014, from

Merdeka Com. (2013). Menteri PU siapkan jurus hilangkan 'rumah hantu' di Jatigede. Retrieved September 6, 2020, from

Mertz, E.(2016). Introduction: New Legal Realism: law and social science in the New Millenium., in Mertz, Elizabeth., Macaulay, Stewart., & Mitchell, Thomas (eds). Translating Law-and- for Today’s Legal Practice. The New Legal Realism.1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1-26. Electronic version. Retrieved January 8, 2020, from

Moita, S. (2020). Analisis Pelaksanaan Pengadaan Tanah untuk Kepentingan Umum di Kabupaten Kotawane Kepulauan. Journal Publicuho. 3 (2). 217-232. Retrieved September 10, 2020, from

Munyo, I and Martin.A.Rossi, (2013). Frustration, euphoria, and violent crime. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 89 (C).136-142. Retrieved September 15, 2020, from organization/vol/89/suppl/C.

Noyon, L, Jan W de Keijser and Jan H. Crijns. (2020). Legitimacy and public opinion: a five-step model. International Journal of Law in Context . 16 (4) 390–402. Retrieved February 12, 2021, from DOI:

Ogien, A. (2015). Pragmatism’s Legacy to Sosiology Respecified. European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosohy. VII-I. Retrieved February 7, 2021, from; DOI : 10.4000/ejpap.371.

Rachmawan, D. (2016). Pola Eskalasi Konflik Pembangnan Infrastruktur: Studi Kasus Pembangunan Waduk Jatigede Kabuaten Sumedang. Masyarakat-Jurnal Sosiologi. 20 (2). 193-211. Retrieved September 6, 2020, from

Rahardjo, S. (2006). Membedah Hukum Progresif. Jakarta: Penerbit Buku Kompas.

Rahardjo, S. (2009). Hukum Progresif: Sebuah Sintesa Hukum Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Genta Publishing.

Rahardjo, S. (2010a). Penegakan hukum Progresif. Jakarta: Penerbit Buku Kompas).

Rahardjo, S. (2010b). Biarkan Hukum Mengalir: Catatan Kritis tentang Pergulatan Manusia dan Hukum. Jakarta: Penerbit Buku Kompas.

Roestamy, M. (2017). Pengadaan Tanah dalam Perspektif Sosiologi Hukum. Jurnal Ilmiah Living Law. 9 (1). 79-90. Retrieved September 6, 2020, from

Rustandi, D.(2015). Jatigede Kisah yang Tergenang. Sumedang: Humas dan Protokol Sekda Kabupaten Sumedang.

Saibih, J. (2019). Using Narrative Theory on Analysis of Law and Human Rights: Searching Truth on Tanjung Priok’s Incident in Indonesia. Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research. 130. 273-284. Retrievied November 2, 2020, from

Sausdal, D and Henrik Vigh. (2019). Anthropological criminology 2.0: Ethnographies of global crime and criminalization. Berghahn Journals 2019 (85). 1-14. Retrieved November 15, 2020, from DOI:

Schrama, W. (2011). How to carry out interdisciplinary legal research: Some experiences with an interdisciplinary research method. Utercht Law Review. 7 (1). 147-162. Retrieved January, 10, 2019 from

Shidarta. (2020). In Search of Scholten’s Legacy: The meaning of the method ofrechtsvinding for the current Indonesian legal discourse. DPSP Annual.1. 197-237. Retrieved August 27, 2020, from

Song, D. (2019). Judicial Pragmatism: Strengths and Weaknesses in Common Law Adjudication, Legislative Interpretation, and Constitutional Interpretation.The John Marshall Review. 52 (2). 369-394. Retrieved January 5, 2020, from

Spradley, J.P, (2016). Participant Observation. (reissued) Long Grove, Illinois: Waveland Press. Inc.

Stepien, M.(2019). Using Case Studies for Research on Judicial Opinions: Some Preliminary Insights. Law and Method. Retrieved January 6, 2020, from DOI: 10.5553/REM/.000045.

Suntoro, A. (2019). Penilaian ganti kerugian dalam pengadaan tanah untuk kepentingan Umum: Perspektif HAM. Bhumi, Jurnal Agraria dan Pertanahan. 5 (1). 13-25. Retrieved September 5, 2020, from DOI:

Thohir, M. (2019). Etnografi Ideasional (Suatu Metodologi Penelitian Kebudayaan) NUSA, 14 (2). 194-205. Retrivied September 15, 2019, from

Vargas, A. M. and Rustamjon Urinboyev. (2015). Everyday Forms of Resistance to the Law: An Ethnographic Study of Street Vendors in Bogotá. Droit et Société 91 .623-638. Retrieved December 10, 2019, from

Wahidah, I. (2019). Inefisiensi Pengadaan Tanah untuk Kepentingan Umum (Studi Kasus Pembangunan Waduk Jatigede di Kabupaten Sumedang) POLITICON: Jurnal Ilmu Politik.1 (1). 51-71. Retrieved September 4, 2020, from

Webley, L. (2016) Stumbling Block in Empirical Legal Research: Case Study Research. Law and Method. 1-21. Retrieved November 10, 2017 from DOI: 10.5553/REM/.000020.

Yin, R.K.(2018). Case Study Research and Applications: design and methods (6th ed). Los Angeles: Sage Publications, Inc.

Zarkasih, H. (2015).Pelaksanaan Prinsip Keadilan dalam pemberan Ganti Rugi pengadaan tanah untuk kepentingan Umum (Studi Kasus Pelebaran Jalan Raya di Kota Praya Kabupaten Lombok Tengah. Jurnal IUS ajian Hukum dan Keadilan. III (8). 382-398. Retrieved September 4, 2020, from



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Crossref logo

Jurnal Dinamika Hukum
Faculty of Law, Universitas Jenderal SoedirmanCopyright of Jurnal Dinamika Hukum
Yustisia IV Building, Law Journal CenterISSN 2407-6562 (Online) ISSN 1410-0797 (Print)
Purwokerto, Central Java, Indonesia, 53122JDH is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License