Legal Pluralism in Indonesia \nBridging the unbridgeable
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the revival of Islamic law and adat (customary) law in the country, this book investigates the history and phenomenon of legal pluralism in Indonesia. It looks at how the ideal of modernity in Indonesia has been characterized by a state-driven effort in the post-colonial era to make the institution of law an inseparable part of national development. Focusing on the aspects of political and ‘conflictual’ domains of legal pluralism in Indonesia, the book discusses the understanding of the state’s attitude and behaviour towards the three largest legal traditions currently operative in the society: adat law, Islamic law and civil law. The first aspect is addressed by looking at how the state specifically deals with Islamic law and adat law, while the second is analysed in terms of actual cases of private interpersonal law, such as interfaith marriage, interfaith inheritance and gendered inheritance. The book goes on to look at how socio-political factors have influenced the relations between state and non-state laws, and how the state’s strategy of accommodation of legal pluralism has in fact largely depended on the extent to which those legal traditions have been able to conform to national ideology. It is a useful contribution for students and scholars of Asian Studies and Law.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".