Wacana Penegakan Hukum di Media Sosial: Analisis Komunikasi Hukum Mahfud MD dan Yusril Ihza Mahendra

Abstract

This article examines law-enforcement discourse on social media by analyzing the legal communication of Mahfud MD and Yusril Ihza Mahendra. Using a qualitative content analysis, the study investigates five posts from X/Twitter and Instagram addressing (1) judicial integrity, (2) state–citizen justice, (3) the relationship between democracy and law, (4) gambling and money laundering, and (5) transitional justice through the Truth and Reconciliation Bill (RUU KKR). The analysis applies a language–argumentation matrix (diction, register, sentence structure, tone/retoric, figurative devices, and language ethics) to map how legal messages are constructed and how they relate to the rule of law and public perceptions of legal legitimacy. The findings reveal two distinct patterns: Mahfud tends to use semi-formal, accessible, and metaphorical critique to highlight structural problems in law enforcement, while Yusril predominantly employs formal, denotative, and policy-oriented language to reinforce institutional legitimacy and legal reasoning. These discursive choices matter because legitimacy fosters voluntary compliance when legal authorities are perceived as “appropriate, proper, and just”. The article also discusses the limits of public criticism within Indonesia’s digital legal framework, particularly Article 27A of Law No. 1/2024 and the Constitutional Court’s interpretive guidance in Decision No. 105/PUU-XXII/2024. Overall, this study contributes to socio-legal scholarship by showing how law-enforcement legitimacy is negotiated in Indonesia’s digital public sphere through elite legal discourse.