SUMSELDAILY.CO.ID, PALEMBANG – A grandmother was convicted for stealing cocoa pods. A farm laborer was sentenced for gleaning crop residue on company land. Meanwhile, perpetrators of corruption involving billions of rupiah often receive light sentences, preferential treatment in prison, and even remissions that the public deems too generous. The phrase “the law is sharp downward, blunt upward” is not just a coffee shop quip. It stems from the real experiences of people who repeatedly witness inequality in the courtroom.
The principle of equality before the law is guaranteed by Article 27 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution: every citizen has equal standing before the law and government. On paper, there is no room for discrimination based on wealth, position, or proximity to power. However, the reality on the ground often suggests otherwise.
The first issue is access. Legal proceedings cost money: legal fees, transportation costs, and time lost from daily work. For the poor, this process can be more devastating than the case itself. Free legal aid is available, but its reach is limited, especially in remote areas. As a result, many people choose to surrender, reconcile with adverse conditions, or even plead guilty to end the process.
Conversely, those with economic power can afford to hire the best legal teams, exploit procedural loopholes, and stall for time. The law ultimately becomes an arena for resource allocation, not simply a contest for truth.
The most dangerous impact of this inequality is the loss of trust. When the public perceives the law as being unfair, it leads to vigilantism, apathy toward the legal process, and the perception that officials can be “bought.” The law loses its authority not because of a lack of provisions, but because of a lack of integrity in its enforcement.
Revisions to the law are not enough to address this issue. First, judicial transparency must be strengthened: decisions must be made public, processes can be monitored, and oversight of judges and prosecutors made more effective. Second, legal aid needs to be expanded and simplified, so it doesn’t become a luxury. Third, a restorative justice approach to minor cases needs to be consistently applied, so that ordinary people are not imprisoned for minor offenses that can be resolved peacefully. Fourth, sanctions against corruption and white-collar crime must be firm and have a deterrent effect.
The public itself also has a role to play. Legal awareness, the courage to report, and social control over authorities are counterbalances that cannot be ignored. The media and civil society organizations have repeatedly proven capable of drawing public attention to cases that would otherwise have escaped the spotlight.
A good law is not only one that is neatly written, but one that is felt to be fair by all levels. As long as treatment disparities persist, the phrase “sharp down, blunt up” will continue to be a relevant criticism. Justice should not be a luxury. It is a basic right, and the state is obliged to ensure that it reaches everyone, regardless of who is standing before the judge.
