Article Sidebar

Download
Download Article

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study examines how customary values and positive law are negotiated in the resolution of social conflicts within local communities amid ongoing processes of modernization. The objective of the research is to analyze the persistence, adaptation, and interaction of customary norms and formal legal systems from a legal anthropological perspective, while identifying the implications of such interactions for legitimacy, justice outcomes, and sustainable governance. The study employs a qualitative research approach grounded in a systematic literature review of classical and contemporary scholarship in legal anthropology, socio-legal studies, and conflict resolution. Through thematic content analysis, the research synthesizes recurring patterns, conceptual arguments, and empirical findings on legal pluralism, forum choice, and hybrid dispute-resolution mechanisms. The results indicate that modernization does not displace customary law but reshapes the conditions under which it operates, leading to negotiated and hybrid forms of legality. Customary mechanisms remain socially legitimate and effective, particularly for community-based disputes, while positive law is strategically mobilized for enforceability and external recognition. The key finding of this study is that social conflict resolution in plural legal contexts is best understood as a process of negotiated legality, in which customary values and state law are continuously reinterpreted and combined. These findings contribute to theoretical debates on legal pluralism and offer insights into the design of inclusive and sustainable conflict-resolution frameworks in modernizing societies.

Keywords

Legal Pluralism Customary Law Positive Law Social Conflict Resolution Modernization

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Meiyani, E., & Mochammad, F. H. (2026). Negotiating Customary Values: A Legal Anthropological Study of Social Conflict Resolution in Local Communities Amid Modernization. Golden Ratio of Mapping Idea and Literature Format, 6(2), 1426–1434. https://doi.org/10.52970/grmilf.v6i2.1764
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Griffiths, J. (1986). What is legal pluralism? Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 18(24), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.1986.10756387
  2. Malinowski, B. (1926). Crime and custom in savage society. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  3. Merry, S. E. (1988). Legal pluralism. Law and Society Review, 22(5), 869–896. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053638
  4. Merry, S. E. (2006). Human rights and gender violence: Translating international law into local justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226520759.001.0001
  5. Moore, S. F. (1973). Law and social change: The semi-autonomous social field as an appropriate subject of study. Law and Society Review, 7(4), 719–746. https://doi.org/10.2307/3052967
  6. Tamanaha, B. Z. (2008). Understanding legal pluralism: Past to present, local to global. Sydney Law Review, 30(3), 375–411.
  7. von Benda-Beckmann, F. (2002). Who is afraid of legal pluralism? Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 34(47), 37–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2002.10756539
  8. von Benda-Beckmann, F., & von Benda-Beckmann, K. (2006). The dynamics of change and continuity in plural legal orders. Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 38(53–54), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2006.10756596
  9. Woodman, G. R. (2011). Legal pluralism and the search for justice. Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 43(63), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2011.10756666
  10. International Commission of Jurists. (2020). Traditional justice systems and human rights. Geneva: International Commission of Jurists.
  11. Rochaeti, N. (2023). Restorative justice as a paradigm in Indonesian criminal justice reform. Sriwijaya Law Review, 7(2), 153–168. https://doi.org/10.28946/slrev.vol7.iss2.1919.pp153-168
  12. Simanjuntak, R., Prasetyo, T., & Nugroho, H. (2025). Living law and criminal justice reform in Indonesia. Analele Stiintifice ale Universitatii Ovidius Constanta, Seria Stiinte Administrative, 17(1), 45–60.
  13. Lubis, A. F. (2025). Integrating customary values and mediation in land dispute resolution. Legality: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum, 33(1), 101–118.
  14. Hariri, A. (2024). Legal pluralism and access to justice in Indonesia. Walisongo Law Review, 6(2), 211–230.
  15. Mas’ad Saleh, M. (2025). Judicial reasoning between positivism and living law in Indonesia. Journal of Eastern Asia Studies, 14(1), 67–82.