Exploring Judges’ Lived Experiences in Applying Restorative Justice in Indonesian Juvenile Cases

Abstract

Restorative justice has emerged as a transformative paradigm in contemporary criminal justice systems, emphasizing reconciliation, rehabilitation, and moral repair over punishment. Within this framework, the Indonesian judicial system represents a critical site for exploring how judges internalize and interpret restorative principles amid legal reform. However, existing studies have primarily examined restorative justice through procedural or policy-based analyses, leaving unclear how judges experience and embody these principles in their professional and moral decision-making. This study applies an interpretative phenomenological approach (IPA) to investigate how judges perceive, interpret, and enact restorative justice in juvenile criminal cases, uncovering the moral and emotional dimensions that shape judicial practice. The methodological design of this study involved a clearly defined phenomenological protocol, encompassing purposive sampling, in-depth semi-structured interviews, and systematic IPA-based coding and theme development. Using semi-structured interviews with eight judges from various regional courts, the study reveals four core themes: moral–legal tension, institutional constraints, emotional burden, and the humanization of justice through reflective decision-making. These findings demonstrate that restorative justice, as experienced by judges, transcends legal formalism and becomes a lived moral encounter grounded in empathy, ethical reflection, and social responsibility. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of judicial consciousness within restorative justice and highlights the necessity of integrating human-centered approaches in legal reform. These insights not only expand theoretical discourse in criminology and law but also provide practical implications for judicial training and the sustainability of restorative practices across diverse legal contexts.