DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/jphi.v8i2.376-392

Affirmation of Gustav Radbruch’s Teachings on Law and Justice as a Cultural Products of Society (Philosophical Perspective)

*FX Adji Samekto orcid scopus  -  Faculty of Law, Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia
Aditya Yuli Sulistyawan orcid scopus  -  Faculty of Law, Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia
Misako Shimotsuji  -  The Japan Foundation, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Citation Format:
Abstract
Gustav Radbruch’s thought was profoundly influenced by various Neo-Kantian movements that flourished in Germany between 1900 and 1925, movements that sought to transcend the irreconcilable antitheses found within the teachings of Immanuel Kant. This paper aims to address the question of whether the construction of Gustav Radbruch’s legal theory is rooted in Immanuel Kant’s doctrine of the categorical imperative. The analysis concludes that Radbruch, as a Neo-Kantian, emphasized justice as the fundamental concept of law, positing that the essence of justice lies in equality among human beings.. Consequently, law can be understood as a set of rules aimed at realizing justice and legal certainty for the benefit of society. While justice as a legal ideal is universal, its manifestation in regulations and law enforcement must be contextual, as it requires consideration of the specific time and place in which the law is enacted and applied.These differing values influence societal culture, which in turn impacts the laws established by that society. Ultimately, this article concludes that, for Gustav Radbruch, culture constituted the patterns of behavior that serve as the source in the law formation within a society.
Fulltext View|Download Email colleagues
Keywords: Gustav Radburch; Justice; Law; Culture

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Conceptual Article
Language : EN
  1. Al'anam, M. (2025). Teori Keadilan Perspektif Gustav Radbruch: Hubungan Moral Dan Hukum. Jurnal Humaniora : Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Ekonomi Dan Hukum, 9(1), 119–133. https://doi.org/10.30601/humaniora.v9i1.6393
  2. Arifin, R. (2022). Translating The Meaning of Justice And Legal Protection : What Exactly Is Justice ?. Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies,7(1),i-iv. https://doi.org/10.15294/jils.v7i1.57881
  3. Barman, S. (2025). Kant on the Universality of Moral Principles: An Analysis. Asian Journal of Philosophy and Religion, 4(1), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.55927/ajpr.v4i1.13855
  4. Firdaus, M. B. (2025). Dialektika Keadilan, Kepastian, Kemanfaatan Hukum dalam Perspektif Gustav Radbruch pada Hukum Indonesia. Jurnal Kajian Hukum Dan Kebijakan Publik, 3(1), 357–367. https://doi.org/10.62379/qy4b6z80
  5. Bisogni, G. (2022). A Forerunner of the Constitutional State: Gustav Radbruch and the Philosophy of Law (1932). Materiali per Una Storia Della Cultura Giuridica, 2022(2), 339 – 355. https://doi.org/10.1436/105735
  6. Bix, B. H. (2011). Radbruch’s Formula and Conceptual Analysis. The American Journal of Jurisprudence, 56(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajj/56.1.45
  7. Bloomfield, P. (2024). Justice as the Virtue of Respect. Journal of Ethics, 28(4), 743–768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-024-09489-2
  8. Borgohain, S. (2019). The Concept of Individualism in the Liberal theories of Locke , Kant and Mill. International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research, 7(2),148–152. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajj/56.1.45
  9. Chroust, A.-H. (1944). The Philosophy of Law of Gustav Radbruch. The Philosophical Review,53(1),23–45. https://doi.org/10.2307/2181218
  10. de Matos, S. M. M. (2016). The legal hermeneutics of Gustav Radbruch. Revista de Estudos Constitucionais, 8(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.4013/rechtd.2016.81.03
  11. Ezedike, E. U. (2020). A Contemporary Analysis of Kant ’ s Concept of Goodwill and the Categorical Imperative. Pinisi Discretion Review,3(2),185–194. https://doi.org/10.26858/pdr.v1i1.13625
  12. Friedman, W. (1960). Gustav Radbruch. Vanderbilt Law Review, 14(1), 191–209. https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol14/iss1/9/
  13. Gegenava, D. (2022). Gustav Radburch and Georgian Translation of “Philosophy of Law.” Journal Legal Methods, 6(SE-Articles). https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.02
  14. Grishin, K. (2024). Pre War and Post War Conceptions of Gustav Radbruch. Lomonosov Law Journal, 65, 68–86. https://doi.org/10.55959/MSU0130-0113-11-65-2-4
  15. Hayvon, J. C. (2024). Action against inequalities: a synthesis of social justice & equity, diversity, inclusion frameworks. International Journal for Equity in Health, 23(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-024-02141-3
  16. Isman, I. (2020). Legal Reasoning Comparative Model of Asy Syatibi And Gustav Radbruch. Nurani: Jurnal Kajian Syari’ah Dan Masyarakat,20(1),49–56. https://doi.org/10.19109/nurani.v20i1.6089
  17. Laurence, B. (2023). Justice in Theory and Practice: Debates about Utopianism and Political Action. Philosophy Compass, 18(11),1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12945
  18. Leawoods, H. (2000). Gustav Radbruch: An Extraordinary Legal Philosopher. Journal of Law & Policy, 2. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_journal_law_policy/vol2/iss1/16
  19. Mertens, T. (2003). Nazism, Legal Positivism And Radbruch’s Thesis On Statutory Injustice. Law and Critique, 14, 277–295. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:LACQ.0000005215.60293.99
  20. Izzo., V. N. (2024). Reading Radbruch’s Philosophy of Law: The Usefulness of Moral Conflict and Contradictions for the Constitutional State. Soft Power, 9(17), 10. https://editorial.ucatolica.edu.co/index.php/SoftP/article/view/6201
  21. Nnajiofor, O. G., & Ifeakor, C. S. (2016). Robert Nozick’s entitlement theory of justice: a critique. OGIRISI: A New Journal of African Studies,12(1),170. https://doi.org/10.4314/og.v12i1.8
  22. Paulson, S. L. (2011). The very idea of legal positivism. Journal of the Polish Section of IVR,2(15),139–165. https://pos.direito.ufmg.br/rbep/index.php/rbep/article/view/130/125
  23. Petkova, T. (2019). The Idea of Tolerance – John Locke and Immanuel Kant. Open Journal for Studies in Philosophy, 3, 17–24. https://doi.org/10.32591/coas.ojsp.0301.03017p
  24. Von Der Pfordten, D. (2008). Radbruch as an Affirmative Holist - On the Question of What Ought to Be Preserved of His Philosophy. Ratio Juris, 21, 387-403. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9337.2008. 00396.x
  25. Pinheiro, F. F., & Bueno, F. C. (2023). Gustav Radbruch’s Legal Culturalism System; [O Culturalismo Jurídico Relativista de Gustav Radbruch]. Revista Eletronica Direito e Sociedade,11(3). https://doi.org/10.18316/redes.v11i3.7167
  26. Radbruch, G., Paulson, B. L., & Paulson, S. L. (2006). Five Minutes of Legal Philosophy (1945). Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 26(1),13–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqi042
  27. Rajpoot, S. (2023). Critical Analysis of Gustav Radbruch’s ’Five Minutes of Legal Philosophy, 1945. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4830607
  28. Renngur, R. H. (2026). Deconstruction of Gustav Radbruch’s Basic Legal Idea of Zweckmäßigkeit. Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 10(1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.24246/jrh.2025.v10.i1.p23-44
  29. Sajó, A. (2024). Militant Rule of Law and Not-so-Bad Law. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 16(3),525–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-024-00221-8
  30. Serediuk, V., & Dudar, S. K. (2024). Radbruch’s formula: conceptual analysis and practical importance. Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, 4, 389–396. https://doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2024.84. 4.54
  31. Sijilmassi, A., Safra, L., & Baumard, N. (2024). “Our roots run deep”: Historical myths as culturally evolved technologies for coalitional recruitment. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 47. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X2400 0013
  32. Spaak, T. (2008). Meta-Ethics and Legal Theory: The Case of Gustav Radbruch. Law and Philosophy,28,261–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-008-9036-8
  33. Swenson, G. (2018). Legal pluralism in theory and practice. International Studies Review, 20(3),438–462. https://doi.org/10.1093/ISR/VIX060
  34. Tamanaha, B. Z. (2018). Understanding Legal Pluralism: Past to Present, Local to global†. Legal Theory and the Social Sciences, 30(3), 447–483. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315091891-17
  35. Tan, S. (2021). Radbruch’s Formula Revisited: The Lex Injusta Non Est Lex Maxim in Constitutional Democracies. Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence, 34, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2021.12
  36. Tkacz, M. A. (2020). Law and Morality in Gustav Radbruch’s Legal Philosophy with Reference to the Thought of Immanuel Kant. Gubernaculum et Administratio, 1(21), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.16926/gea.2020.01.06
  37. Verma, D. (2024). Theories of Justice: Analysing Rawls and Nozick. ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v5.i1.2024.3847
  38. Viktorahadi, R. F. B. (2024). Human Life Obligations According To Immanuel Kant. International Journal of Humanities Education and Social Sciences (IJHESS), 4(2). https://doi.org/10.55227/ijhess.v4i2.923
  39. Vinx, L. (2025). Gustav Radbruch ’ s Legal Philosophy: From the Cultural Concept of Law to the Radbruch Formula. Revista Da Faculdade de Direito Da Universidade de Lisboa,627–650. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.17863/CAM.119726
  40. Hamad, W. M., & Mahdi, A. S. (2022). Self- conscious in modern liberal political thought (John Locke, Immanuel Kant as a model). Tikrit Journal For Political Science, 4(30),243–278. https://doi.org/10.25130/tjfps.v4i30.95
  41. Zajadło, J. (2023). Axiology of Law – from General to Specific Philosophy of Law; [Aksjologia prawa – od ogólnej filozofii do konkretnej filozofii prawa]. Studia Iuridica Lublinensia,32(4),191–217. https://doi.org/10.17951/sil.2023.32.4.191-217
  42. Adachi, H. (2023). Radbruch, Gustav. In: Zanetti, G., Sellers, M., Kirste, S. (Eds.), Handbook of the History of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy. Studies in the History of Law and Justice, Vol.24. Switzerland: Springer,Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19550-1_30
  43. Alexy, R. (2015). Law and Morality: A Continental European Perspective. In James D. Wright (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (second edition) (pp. 479–482). London: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.63045-3
  44. Alexy, R. (2021). Gustav Radbruch’s Concept of Law. In Law's Ideal Dimension (pp. 107–118). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198796831.003.0008
  45. Atkinson, S. (2013). The Politics Book: Big Ideas Simply Explained. London.Dorling Kindersly
  46. Borowski, M. (2019). Radbruch’s formula and human rights. In Massimo La Torre, Leone Niglia, & Mart Susi (Eds.), The Quest for Rights: Ideal and Normative Dimensions (27-48). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788971775.00007
  47. Huijbers, T. (1982). Filsafat Hukum dalam Lintasan Sejarah. Yogyakarta: Kanisius
  48. Law, S. (2007). The Great Philosophers The Lives and Ideas of History’s Greatest Thinkers. London: Quercus
  49. Li, M., & Leidner, B. (2023). Transitional Justice. In Christopher Cohrs, Nadine Knab, Gert Sommer (Eds.), Handbook of Peace Psychology. https://open.uni-marburg.de/ server/api/core/bitstreams/874d32d8-98ae-481b-a6eb-d2a4d278a36d/
  50. Luoma, C. (2025). (Re)Theorizing the Relationship Between Transitional Justice and Cultural Rights. In Cultural Rights and Wrongs in Transitional Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10. 1093/oso/9780198911371.001.0001
  51. Saliger, F. (2004). Content and Practical Significance of Radbruch’s Formula. Frankfurt: Goethe Frankfurt University Publication. https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/bitstreams/bb257f73-718b-4feb-a36c-d05bf700d994/download
  52. Skuczyński, P. (2016). Are We Facing a Crisis of Law? Reflections in Reference to the So-Called Claim to Correctness Problem. London.Dorling Kindersly
  53. Tamanaha, B. Z. (2021). Functions of the Rule of Law. In Jens Meierhenrich & Martin Loughlin (Eds.), The Cambridge Companion to the Rule of Law. https://repository.library. washu.edu/law_scholarship/318/
  54. Weeks, M. (2014). Heads Up Philosophy. London: Dorling Kindersly Limited
  55. Wolf, E. (1958). Revolution or Evolution in Gustav Radbruch’s Legal Philosophy. Notre Dame: Natural Law Forum. https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/nd_naturallaw_forum/25%0A%0A
  56. Rolf, M. (2010). Immanuel Kant. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant/

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update:

No citation recorded.