Rethinking Comparative Constitutionalism: Günter Frankenberg’s Critical Approach and the Methodology of Comparative Law in Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38043/jah.v9i2.7413Keywords:
comparative constitutionalism, IKEA theory, constitutional transfer, comparative methodology, constitutionAbstract
Comparative analysis has become an important tool in Indonesian constitutional law scholarship, yet its use is not always accompanied by methodological reflection on what is being compared, why a particular jurisdiction is selected, and how constitutional ideas change when transferred into a different legal environment. This article examines these questions through Günter Frankenberg’s critical approach to comparative law, with particular attention to cognitive control, decontextualization, recontextualization, odd details, and his IKEA theory of constitutional transfer. This doctrinal legal research employs conceptual, intellectual-historical, and critical approaches to comparative legal scholarship and selected Indonesian legal studies that explicitly employ comparative methods. The article demonstrates that the central problem in comparative constitutional analysis does not lie in the use of foreign experiences itself, but in the tendency to treat foreign law as transferable material without sufficiently examining context, the position of the comparer, and the transformation of meaning that occurs through the process of transfer. Based on a reconstruction of Frankenberg’s scholarship, the article develops an operational framework that places reflexivity, jurisdictional selection, contextual analysis, identification of transformed meanings, and post-transfer evaluation at the centre of comparative inquiry. The framework is not presented as a direct reproduction of Frankenberg’s methodology, but as a methodological development adapted to the needs of constitutional law scholarship in Indonesia. The article argues that comparative constitutionalism should move beyond the search for similarities or best practices and instead function as a critical method for understanding differences, testing assumptions, and questioning the movement of constitutional ideas across legal contexts.
Downloads
References
Ackerman, B. (1997). The rise of world constitutionalism. Virginia Law Review, 83(4), 771–797.
Balkin, J. M., & Levinson, S. (1998). The canons of constitutional law. Harvard Law Review, 111(4), 963–1024. https://doi.org/10.2307/1342010
Bartole, S. (2017). Comparative constitutional law – An indispensable tool for the creation of transnational law. European Constitutional Law Review, 13(4), 601–610. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019617000293
Bogdandy, A. von. (2009). The past and promise of doctrinal constructivism: A strategy for responding to the challenges facing constitutional scholarship in Europe. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 7(3), 364–400. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mop009
Bognetti, G. (2011). Diritto costituzionale comparato: Approccio metodologico. Stem Mucchi Editore.
Boralevi, L. C. (2002). Classical foundational myths of European republicanism: The Jewish Commonwealth. In M. van Gelderen & Q. Skinner (Eds.), Republicanism: A shared European heritage (pp. 247–261). Cambridge University Press.
Brewer-Carías, A.-R. (1989). Judicial review in comparative law. (Publisher not provided).
Breslin, B. (2009). From words to worlds: Exploring constitutional functionality. (Publisher not provided).
Cheibub, J. A. (2007). Presidentialism, parliamentarism and democracy. Cambridge University Press.
Choudhry, S. (Ed.). (2007). The migration of constitutional ideas. Cambridge University Press.
Curran, V. G. (1998). Cultural immersion, difference and categories in U.S. comparative law. American Journal of Comparative Law, 46, 657–677.
Dixon, R. (2008). A democratic theory of constitutional comparison. American Journal of Comparative Law, 56(4), 947–978.
Dixon, R., & Ginsburg, T. (Eds.). (2014). Comparative constitutional law in Asia. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781002704
Elkins, Z., Ginsburg, T., & Melton, J. (2009). The endurance of national constitutions. Cambridge University Press.
Eves, W., Hudson, J., Ivarsen, I., & White, S. B. (Eds.). (2021). Common law, civil law, and colonial law: Essays in comparative legal history from the twelfth to the twentieth centuries. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108955195
Favoreu, L. (2001). Constitutional courts. (Publisher not provided).
Fontana, D. (2011). The rise and fall of comparative constitutional law in the postwar era. Yale Journal of International Law, 36(1), 1–50. (SSRN version: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1752522
)
Frankenberg, G. (1985). Critical comparisons: Re-thinking comparative law. Harvard International Law Journal, 26, 411–456.
Frankenberg, G. (2010). Constitutional transfer: The IKEA theory revisited. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 8(3), 563–579. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/moq023
Frankenberg, G. (2012). Comparative constitutional law. In M. Bussani & U. Mattei (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to comparative law (pp. 171–190). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139017206.011
Gardner, J. (2001). Legal positivism: 5½ myths. American Journal of Jurisprudence, 46, 199–227.
Geertz, C. (1983). Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology. Basic Books.
Ginsburg, T. (2003). Judicial review in new democracies: Constitutional courts in Asian cases. Cambridge University Press.
Ginsburg, T. (2010). Studying Japanese law because it’s there. American Journal of Comparative Law, 58, 15–25.
Ginsburg, T. (2012). Introduction. In T. Ginsburg (Ed.), Comparative constitutional design (pp. 1–12). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139105712.001
Ginsburg, T., Elkins, Z., & Melton, J. (2012). Do executive term limits cause constitutional crises? In T. Ginsburg (Ed.), Comparative constitutional design (pp. 350–380). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139105712.016
Graziadei, M. (2009). Legal transplants and the frontiers of legal knowledge. Theoretical Inquiries in Law, 10, 723–743.
Grimm, D. (2010). The achievement of constitutionalism and its prospects in a changed world. In P. Dobner & M. Loughlin (Eds.), The twilight of constitutionalism? Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199585007.003.0001
Grosswald Curran, V. (1998). Cultural immersion, difference and categories in U.S. comparative law. American Journal of Comparative Law, 46, 657–677.
Hirschl, R. (2005). The question of case selection in comparative constitutional law. American Journal of Comparative Law, 53(1), 125–156.
Hirschl, R. (2014). Comparative matters: The renaissance of comparative constitutional law. Oxford University Press.
Hirschl, R. (2019). Comparative methodologies. In R. Masterman & R. Schütze (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to comparative constitutional law (pp. 11–39). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316716731.002
Horowitz, D. L. (2013). Constitutional change and democracy in Indonesia. Cambridge University Press.
Jackson, V. C. (2012). Comparative constitutional law: Methodologies. In M. Rosenfeld & A. Sajó (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of comparative constitutional law. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199578610.013.0004
Jhering, R. von. (1955). Geist des römischen rechts auf den verschiedenen stufen seiner entwicklung (9th ed.). B. Schwabe.
Katznelson, I., & Milner, H. (Eds.). (2002). Political science: The state of the discipline. W. W. Norton.
Kommers, D. P. (2019). The value of comparative constitutional law. German Law Journal, 20(4), 524–531. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2019.45
Krisch, N. (2010). Beyond constitutionalism: The pluralist structure of postnational law. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199228317.001.0001
Lachmayer, K. (2013). Constitutional reasoning as legitimacy of constitutional comparison. German Law Journal, 14(8), 1463–1491. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200002352
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).
Lee, J. T.-T. (2007). Interpreting bills of rights: The value of a comparative approach. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 5(1), 122–152. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mol042
Leonard, J. D. (1995). Introduction. In J. D. Leonard (Ed.), Legal studies as cultural studies: A reader in (post)modern critical theory (p. 3). State University of New York Press.
Maduro, M. (2012). Three claims of constitutional pluralism. In M. Avbelj & J. Komárek (Eds.), Constitutional pluralism in the European Union and beyond (p. 67). Hart Publishing.
Maitland, F. W. (1911). Why the history of English law is not written. In H. A. L. Fisher (Ed.), The collected papers of Frederic William Maitland (Vol. 1, pp. 480–497). Cambridge University Press.
Marique, Y. (2016). [Review of the book Comparative law, by M. Siems]. Edinburgh Law Review, 20, 109–111. https://doi.org/10.3366/elr.2016.0332
Menski, W. (2006). Comparative law in a global context: The legal systems of Asia and Africa (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Meuwese, A., & Versteeg, M. (2012). Quantitative methods for comparative constitutional law. In M. Adams & J. Bomhoff (Eds.), Practice and theory in comparative law (p. 233). Cambridge University Press.
Nelken, D. (2007). Comparative law and comparative legal studies. In E. Örücü & D. Nelken (Eds.), Comparative law: A handbook (p. 3). Hart Publishing.
Pitkin, H. F. (1987). The idea of a constitution. Journal of Legal Education, 37, 167–169.
Resnik, J. (2005). Law’s migration: American exceptionalism, silent dialogues, and federalism’s multiple ports of entry. Yale Law Journal, 115(6), 1564–1670.
Rosenfeld, M. (2010). The identity of the constitutional subject: Selfhood, citizenship, culture, and community. Oxford University Press.
Sajó, A. (1999). Limiting government: An introduction to constitutionalism. Central European University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7829/j.ctv10tq68z
Sartori, G. (1996). Comparative constitutional engineering: An inquiry into structures, incentives and outcomes (2nd ed.). New York University Press.
Saunders, C. (2013). Constitutional reasoning as legitimacy of constitutional comparison: Comment on Konrad Lachmayer. German Law Journal, 14(8), 1493–1499. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200002364
Saunders, C. (2021). Constitution transformation. Global Constitutionalism, 10(2), 237–255. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045381720000246
Schauer, F. (2012). Comparative constitutional compliance: Notes towards a research agenda. In M. Adams & J. Bomhoff (Eds.), Practice and theory in comparative law (pp. 212–229). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511863301.010
Siegel, R. (2006). Constitutional culture, social movement conflict and constitutional change: The case of the de facto ERA. California Law Review, 94, 1323–1419.
Slaughter, A.-M. (2004). A new world order. Princeton University Press.
Spamann, H. (2015). Empirical comparative law. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 11, 131–153.
Swain, W. (2012). The common law and the Code civil: The curious case of the law of contract. In J. M. Moreteau et al. (Eds.), Comparative legal history (pp. 379–399). (Publisher not provided).
Teubner, G. (2012). Constitutional fragments: Societal constitutionalism in globalization. Oxford University Press.
Tushnet, M. (1999). The possibilities of comparative constitutional law. Yale Law Journal, 108(6), 1225–1309. https://doi.org/10.2307/797327
Tushnet, M. (2008). Weak courts, strong rights: Judicial review and social welfare rights in comparative constitutional law. Princeton University Press.
Tushnet, M. (2014). Advanced introduction to comparative constitutional law (2nd ed.). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Ulfstein, G. (2009). The international judiciary. In J. Klabbers, A. Peters, & G. Ulfstein (Eds.), The constitutionalization of international law (p. 126). Oxford University Press.
Walker, N. (2002). The idea of constitutional pluralism. Modern Law Review, 65(3), 317–359. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1097577
Watson, A. (1974). Legal transplants: An approach to comparative law. Scottish Academic Press.
Whitman, J. Q. (n.d.). The world historical significance of European legal history: An interim report. In H. Pihlajamäki et al. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of European legal history (pp. 3–21). Oxford University Press.
Yeh, J.-R., & Chang, W.-C. (2011). The emergence of East Asian constitutionalism: Features in comparison. Journal of Comparative Law, 59(3), 805–839.
Young, E. A. (2005). Foreign law and the denominator problem. Harvard Law Review, 119, 148–(page range not provided).
Published
Versions
- 2026-09-29 (3)
- 2026-09-29 (2)
- 2026-09-29 (1)
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Febriansyah Ramadhan, Tariq Kameel, Adi, Supriyadi A Arief
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Ciptaan disebarluaskan di bawah Lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi-BerbagiSerupa 4.0 Internasional.
