Article

Adoption and Implementation of Asian Journal of Legal Education

8(1) 52–65, 2021
Clinical Legal Education © 2020 The West Bengal National
University of Juridical Sciences
Programmes in the Indonesian Reprints and permissions:
in.sagepub.com/journals-permissions-india
Legal Education System DOI: 10.1177/2322005820961208
journals.sagepub.com/home/ale

Saru Arifin1, Bayangsari Wedhatami1 and

Riska Alkadri1

Abstract
Legal education in Indonesia has followed a traditional model, focusing on the rote transfer of legal
doctrine. Students are taught legal theories and sources of law but not how to critically apply the
law in concrete real-world scenarios. Consequently, law graduates tend to be unprepared for the
workforce, which is a regular complaint of employers. To overcome this impediment, some law
faculties in Indonesia adopted clinical legal education (CLE) as a ‘new method’ in the legal education
system, whereby students not just learn theory but also gain practical legal experience. This article
analyses the adoption of the model and methods of applying CLE to legal education in Indonesia. This
study uses the doctrinal research method with a qualitative approach. It is found that the adoption
of CLE in Indonesia is diverse; some programmes include it in the core curriculum, while others
make it an extracurricular activity. CLE programmes generally use three of six methods, namely street
law, advocacy and internship. The differences in the three methods of CLE directly influence their
success, exposing participants to interaction with live clients, public speaking and networking. This
article recommends that in order to achieve the optimal implementation of CLE, uniformity of the CLE
adoption model in Indonesia’s legal education curriculum is needed.

Introduction
The legal education system in Indonesia remains conservative, similar to those of other Asian regions,
especially those that adhere to the legal traditions of civil law systems, including China, Japan and
Korea.2 Some of the sharpest criticisms of the conservatism of legal education in Indonesia have come
from the Dutch Indonesian legal expert Adrian Bedner, who has vociferously expressed concerns that the

1
Faculty of Law, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Gunungpati, Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia.
2
  Setsuo Miyazawa et al., The Reform of Legal Education in East Asia, 4 Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 333–60 (2008).

Corresponding author:
Saru Arifin, Faculty of Law, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Campus Sekaran, Building K, Gunungpati, Semarang,
Central Java 50229, Indonesia.
E-mail: saruarifin@mail.unnes.ac.id
Arifin et al. 53

law faculties in Indonesia lack the tradition of training students to solve legal problems.3 This deficiency,
Bedner claims, has resulted in Indonesian law faculties producing graduates who are unprepared for the
practice of law.4 Law students in Indonesia are familiar with legal theories and sources of law, but they
do not know how to use them.5 Bedner states:

…Indonesian law faculties have no tradition of training their students in resolving legal cases. This practice
means that Indonesian law graduates never learn to do law…The study of law in Indonesia is, therefore, highly
theoretical, but at the same time, superficial. The problem is that with the absence of access to legal sources
such as implementing regulations, judgments, minutes of parliament, custom, and to lesser extent legal doctrine,
students only learn that these are legal sources, but not how to use them.

This concern has been empirically established by the reality on the ground level. Many employers have
complained about law graduates’ limited ability to hit the ground running. Furthermore, these employers
pin the blame on law faculties’ curricula for graduating students who lack fundamental skills for working
in the legal profession.6
These deficiencies are well known. In an effort to reorient and improve the quality of legal education
in Indonesia, the government issued Decree of the Minister of Education and Culture Number
017/D/0/1993 concerning law faculty curriculum, amended by Decree of the Minister of Education and
Culture Number 0325/U/1994. The impetus for this decree partly arose from a high number of consumer
complaints against law faculty graduates who were referred to as ‘not paying attention to the market
needs’.7
To address the criticism that Indonesian legal education lacks practical training, Uli Parulian
Sihombing, Executive Director of the Indonesian Legal Resource Center (ILRC), offered a middle
ground between the existing system and a wholesale reform. He separated the legal education into two
categories, academic and professional. Academic legal education provides students with rote legal
knowledge. Sihombing explained that legal education with an academic model teaches students what the
law is, the areas of law, the subject matter of each area of law and basic legal principles. In this context,
legal education is limited to transferring knowledge and theory rather than demonstrating how to apply
such knowledge to real life or legal practice. On the other hand, professional legal education aims to train
students to apply the law to real cases. Students with professional legal education are expected to graduate
with expertise in applying the law.8 Other scholars have disagreed with providing legal graduates only
either an academic education or a practical education. Professor Hikmahanto Juwana, SH, LLM., PhD,
Chancellor of General Achmad Yani University (UNJANI) 2020–2024 and a prominent Indonesian
international law scholar, has championed for the integration of academic and practical legal instruction
so that law graduates are imparted with both a broad knowledge of the law and the competence to apply
the law to the real world.9 Others, however, have pushed back against the law faculties’ role in practical

3
  Id.
4
  Id.
5
  Adriaan Bedner, Indonesian Legal Scholarship and Jurisprudence as an Obstacle for Transplanting Legal Institutions, 5 Hague
J. Rule Law 253–73 (2013).
6 
 Sartono Sahlan et al., Kebutuhan Program Continuing Legal Education bagi Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum, 10 Pandecta Res. Law
J. 233–47 (2015).
7
  Wessy Trisna, Pedoman Klinis Hukum (Universitas Medan Area, 2017).
8
  P. Sihombing, Mengajarkan Hukum yang Berkeadilan: Cetak Biru Pembaruan Pendidikan Hukum Berbasis Keadilan Sosial
(ILRC, 2009).
9
  H. Juwana, Reformasi Pendidikan Hukum di Indonesia, 35 J. Huk. dan Pembang. 1–26 (2005).
54 Asian Journal of Legal Education 8(1)

training for students. Professor Dr Mochtar Kusumaatmadja, ex-Dean of the Faculty of Law in the
previous Rector of Padjadjaran University, disapproved of requiring law faculties to prepare students for
legal practice. According to him, the responsibility of practical training lies with employers, rather than
universities.10
Despite calls to better prepare law graduates for work in the legal field, the situation changed little
until the reformation era started in May 1998. In 2003, the Bar Association responded to this condition
by requiring licensed attorneys to get additional education in the form of work preparation called the
Special Education for Advocate Profession, jointly managed by the Bar and law faculties. Many law
faculties in Indonesia have gone a step further by adopting clinical legal education (CLE) methods from
the American legal education system. This methodology aims to build the character of students, imbuing
in them sensitivity towards issues like access to justice for socially and economically disadvantaged
populations.11 Universities have implemented CLE in widely varying ways. CLE programmes share the
goal of engaging a select set of participants supported by adequate infrastructure.12
CLE programmes generally aim to integrate three aspects: knowledge, skills and character. Some
experts generalize these three things into experience-based legal education, which provides students
with real world legal experience and skills before graduation.13 Learning professional responsibility is an
essential aspect of any such programme.14
Given the shared goal of improving legal education through CLE, this article analyses the adoption
and implementation of CLE programmes in the Indonesian legal education system and its implications
for students’ CLE. The discussion begins with an introduction that describes the dynamics of legal
education in Indonesia and the background that underlies the writing of this article. Next, an analysis of
the CLE adoption model in the Indonesian legal education system, as well as what methods legal clinics
generally use, follows. The article ends with a conclusion of how is the CLE adopted and implemented
in Indonesian law schools.

CLE Adoption Model in the Legal Education System

Historical Background of CLE in Indonesia

Historically, the idea of CLE has been around for centuries in the Western world. Richard J. Wilson, Prof
of Law and Director of the Human Rights Law Clinic at American University, Washington College of
Law, recounts that CLE is recognized by many (academicians) as forming its roots in the 1800s. Outside
of the United States, for example in Russia, as Professor Alexander Lyublinsky pointed out, the clinical
system in the practice of medicine was adopted (very precisely) as a legal education method called

10
  Mochtar Kusuma Atmadja, Pendidikan Hukum di Indonesia: Penjelasan tentang Kurikulum Tahun 1993, 14 J. Huk. dan
Pembang. 491–501 (2017).
11
  Frank S. Bloch, Access to Justice and the Global Clinical Movement, 997 SSRN Electron. J. 111–39 (2011).
12
  Miyazawa et al., supra note 2.
13
  Bloch, supra note 10. See also, K. R. Kreiling, Clinical Education and Lawyer Competency: The Process of Learning to Learn
from Experience Through Properly Structured Clinical Supervision, 1 Maryl. Law Rev. 8–23 (1981). See also, R. Wilson, Training
for Justice: The Global Reach of Clinical Legal Education, 22 Penn State Int. Law Rev. 421–31 (2004). See also, Peter A. Joy,
The Cost of Clinical Legal Education, 32 Bost. Coll. J. Law Soc. Justice 309–31 (2012). See also, Babsea, Teaching
Methodologies: Practical Law for Cambodians (Wendy Lasky et al., eds., 1 ed. 2011), file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/
fvm939e.pdf.
14
  David Barnhizer, The Clinical Method of Legal Instruction: Its Theory and Implementation, 30 J. Legal Educ. 67–148 (1979).
Arifin et al. 55

Clinical Legal Education. This Russian idea dates back to nearly 16 years before CLE in America
emerged and developed. The idea then spread throughout the world, especially in areas that became free
from dictatorial rule, such as Africa, parts of South and East Asia and Latin America. CLE then took hold
in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. Furthermore, China, after going through its economic depression,
began to reconstruct its legal education system by adopting CLE. Thus, CLE is not limited to Western
Europe.15
The initial idea of adopting the CLE method in Indonesia began in the 1970s, as declared by the
Director-General of Higher Education Prof Dr Doddy Tisna Atmadjaya. The purpose of adopting CLE,
according to Atmadjaya, was to provide education and training to law students—diverse expertise and
practical skills. CLE methods, according to Kusumaatmadja, is a concrete form of legal education system
reform from what used to be ‘free study’ to ‘guided study’. In the spirit of the ‘free study’ curriculum,
students are given full autonomy to attend lectures without being bound by the rules of attendance, and
there is no obligation to write a thesis. On the contrary, in the curriculum of ‘guided studies’, students are
required to attend classes and write a thesis paper.16
For historical reasons, CLE in Indonesia faced institutional obstacles in its embryonic phase. The
‘guided study’ model itself originated from a conference between the deans of the Faculty of Law in
Yogyakarta in 1962. In the conference, many proposals were read about the renewal of legal education,
which then pursued two big ideas: guided study system and upgrading the course for teaching staff.
Unfortunately, the proposals were stopped when the 30 September 1965 movement by the Indonesian
Communist Party planned to overthrow the legitimate government at that time. After the situation,
efforts to continue the renewal of legal education began again in 1967 by an expert committee formed
by the Minister of Higher Education and Science. This expert committee then grew to become a sub-
consortium of legal sciences led by the dean of the Faculty of Law, Padjajaran University, at that time.
Three crucial problems came to the attention of the expert committee regarding the legal education
system in Indonesia:

1. Dealing with the flood of students entering tertiary institutions;

2. Reorienting the aim of higher education in law; and
3. Maintaining and improving the quality of higher education in law.17

The work of the Legal Higher Education Sub-Consortium resulted in significant progress in reforming
the legal education curriculum through integrating it into the Tridharma of Higher Education. The
Tridharma emphasized aspects of developing the capabilities and functions of higher education, namely
education, research and community service. The implementation of the Tridharma of Higher Education
in the law faculty curriculum, outlined in the form of a Minimum Curriculum, represented a minimum
standard for all law faculties in Indonesia for following the ‘guided study’ paradigm. In the Minimum
Curriculum format, law school students had to take written examinations, with a knock-down system
requiring those who did not pass their examinations to repeat the courses. The format also encouraged
research by establishing law faculty research institutes, while community service was nourished through
the Legal Aid Bureau, which provides free assistance to people who cannot afford it. Students are also

15
  Wilson, supra note 12. See also, ILRC, Pendidikan Hukum Klinik: Tinjauan Umum (U.P. Sihombing ed., 1 July 2009).
16
  Atmadja, supra note 9.
17
  Id.
56 Asian Journal of Legal Education 8(1)

equipped with training and skills in practising law, drafting contracts and drafting legislations.18 This
model has essentially persisted across Indonesia’s legal education system.
This brief history of the adoption of CLE methods in the Indonesian legal education system illustrates
the continued focus on knowledge and soft skills of law students who study legal theory and practise it.
Unfortunately, efforts to ensure application of the law in concrete cases have fallen short, and rather the
emphasis still rests on theoretical knowledge.19 The laudable goal of widely implementing CLE
programmes has been inhibited by universities’ limited libraries, books and supporting journals, as well
as the sometimes-narrow scope of instructors’ competence.20

There are Diverse Motivations for and Implementations of CLE Among Indonesian
Law Faculties
The benefits of adopting CLE have long been recognized by Indonesian legal scholars. Kusumaatmadja
explained that CLE was essentially brought to Indonesia by a law professor who studied in the United
States in the 1970s with the idea of using CLE to adjust the dynamics of the Indonesian legal education
curriculum.21 There was a common thread among the early proponents of CLE that such programmes
could develop law students’ soft skills through community service activities while providing legal
assistance to disadvantaged populations. Member countries of the Global Alliance for Justice Education
(GAJE) formulated the idea of the ‘global clinic’ to provide access to justice for poor people with legal
issues, especially in developing countries that were not concerned with legal rights for the poor.22
While there was a general agreement about the importance of CLE, online surveys of several
universities in Indonesia, including Universitas Indonesia, Universitas Udayana, Universitas Pasundan,
Universitas Lambung Mangkurat and Unisbank, show the diversity of models of adoption of the CLE
method in the Indonesian legal education system. One example of this diversity is illustrated in Table 1
displaying the information gathered about the adoption of CLE. The surveys identified five motivations
for the adoption of CLE in the legal education system in Indonesia:

1. Strengthening students’ soft skills;

2. Developing the teaching methods of lecturers;
3. Providing legal practice experience for students; and
4. Granting certification of legal practice skills and preparing students to enter the workforce with
skills in practice while strengthening student character.

The data in Table 1 show how the CLE method adoption model in the legal education system in Indonesia
is divided into three adoption models. Some campuses have offered courses as elective subjects, while
some have made some form of CLE a requirement for graduation. These programmes integrate CLE into
the core of their curriculum. On the other hand, some campuses have made CLE an extracurricular
activity for students outside of formal lectures. A campus has even relegated CLE to a student activity
unit. Still others have attempted to integrate practical learning requirements into their minimum

18
  Id.
19
  Bedner, supra note 3.
20
  Juwana, supra note 8.
21
  Atmadja, supra note 9.
22
  Bloch, supra note 10.
Arifin et al. 57

Table 1.  Background and CLE Adoption Model in Indonesian Legal Education

Background 1.  S trengthening student skills and character

2.  Strengthening soft skills and practical skills and developing interactive
teaching methods
3.  Equipping students’ experiential learning
4.  Being the embodiment of the Student Advocacy Skills Certification Program
5.  Preparing skilled and characterized alumni
Method 1. Become a course (optional)
2. Extracurricular activities (student activity unit)
3. As a method of learning
Challenges 1. Not many lecturers interested
2. Funding
3. Lack of institutional support
4. Changes in learning culture from teaching to practice
5. Compromise on other subjects
6. Need to convince clinical cooperation partners
7. Debate on adoption in the curriculum
8. Politics in the faculty senate
9. Breaking of the rule (students more critic)
Source: Processed from primary data, June 2020.

curriculum, including subjects such as procedural law, criminal procedure, civil procedure, state
administrative court and constitutional court procedural law.
These results indicate a near-universal commitment to better equipping law graduates for the practice
of law through CLE. Aside from this goal, campuses have increasingly recognized that the CLE method
is relatively new and modernizes the legal education system, providing a more inclusive space for
students to actively and critically convey their ideas in class and to solve legal problems in society.
The CLE method is believed by several campuses to be the right method to meet the demands of the
professional world, which wants students to practise the law they learn before graduation.23 The long-
standing debate among legal academics has caused a rift between the two models of legal education: the
academics-oriented legal education model and the profession-oriented legal education model.24 These
two models certainly have apparent conceptual differences with respect to the curriculum; whereas the
academic legal education model emphasizes theory, the professional legal education model focuses more
on analysing cases.25 This philosophical divergence has resulted in widely different adoptions of CLE
among Indonesian law faculties.

Campuses Have Responded with Widely Diverse Approaches to CLE

The diversity in CLE adoption methods in Indonesia’s legal education system appears directly
proportional to the attitude of each campus in responding to CLE as a ‘new method’ in legal education.

23
  Sahlan et al., supra note 4. See also, Jon C. Dubin, Faculty Diversity as a Clinical Legal Education Imperative, 51 Hastings Law
J. 445 (2000).
24
  Juwana, supra note 8.
25
  Sihombing, supra note 7.
58 Asian Journal of Legal Education 8(1)

The responses of Indonesian institutions are quite different from the near-universal embrace of CLE by
US law schools. While there was heated debate in the United States at one point, law schools there view
CLE as essential and most relevant to the law.26
This situation is opposite to the emergence of CLE in Indonesia in the 1970s. Instead of universal
acceptance, CLE became a sub-system of community service by campuses. While Indonesian academics
recognized the value of CLE, the idea did not gain much traction until the re-emergence of ‘CLE’ in the
2010s.27 This intransigence among deans of law faculties, especially state universities, presents serious
challenges to CLE managers and lecturers when introducing CLE to their respective campus environments.
The challenges arise primarily from the attitudes of some lecturers, which range from apathy to outright
hostility. Some more seasoned lecturers ‘reject’ CLE because it is perceived to change the established
‘culture’ of education from the lecture model, wherein lecturers are more dominant in class,28 to a more
interactive and critical education of law.29 This change in some campuses initially was considered a ‘little
threat’, because students became more critical in the class. Nevertheless, the integration of more critical
analysis by students in case analysis is now considered normal.
The adoption of CLE is further complicated by campus politics, whereby faculty senates are divided
in addressing the acceptance of CLE. Campuses are polarized in their views on the debate over the place
CLE should hold in the curriculum structure of each faculty. Often, CLE programmes suffer from half-
hearted support, or there is a tendency to wait and judge the development of CLE in other campuses. This
attitude is reflected in the low support from institutions and the resulting lack of the necessary
infrastructure and funding. With minimal support from campus stakeholders, champions of CLE have
faced pushbacks in even attaining permission to include CLE as a learning method complementing the
methods already available.
Changing deeply entrenched attitudes is no small feat. According to Philip G. Scharg, the clinical
method will overhaul the mindset of lecturers accustomed to teaching independently and freely through
collaborative teaching and field supervision. Of course, such a sea change in educational philosophy
pushes lecturers, especially the most experienced ones, outside their ‘comfort zone’. On the side of the
campus management, deans tend not to provide full support to the clinic directly, adopting a wait-and-
see approach rather than being proactive.30
This foot-dragging by campus leadership partially comes down to the allocation of scarce resources.
Often, campus allocation of funds disproportionately discriminates against CLE, some campuses facing
a complete lack of funding. Peter A. Joy stressed the importance of cost issues in clinical activities to
produce law graduates who are competent and proficient in applying it. Joy even suggested that the
allocation of legal clinic costs should be an essential parameter in measuring the quality of graduates
from a campus. The higher the allocation of funds to finance clinical activities, the better it will be for
students to progress in their legal practice skills. Therefore, according to Joy, campuses can increase
student tuition fees as long as these increases correlate to graduates becoming more competitive in the
world of work and proving their ability to practice law.31

26
  Frank Bloch, The Andragogical Basis of Clinical Legal Education, 35 Vanderbilt Law Rev. (1982). See also, Scott L. Munger
et al., Mobilizing Law for Justice in Asia: A Comparative Approach, 31 Wisconsin Int. Law J. 353–420 (2013).
27
  Atmadja, supra note 9.
28
  Joy, supra note 12.
29
  Peter A Joy, Political Interference with Clinical Legal Education, 74 Tulane Law Rev. 235–84 (2000).
30
  Philip G. Schrag & Philip G. Schrag, Constructing a Clinic, 247 Clin. Law Rev. 175–247 (1996).
31
  Joy, supra note 12. See also, Joy, supra note 28. See also, Peter A. Joy et al., Building Clinical Legal Education Programs in a
Country Without a Tradition of Graduate Professional Legal Education: Japan Educational Reform as a Case Study, University
of London Conference 1–52 (2005).
Arifin et al. 59

CLE is in Line with the Goals of Indonesian Law Education

Although there is no universal response or model of adoption of the CLE method across various
campuses, there is a common perception of the importance of providing students with soft skills before
graduation. This method is relevant to the spirit built into the new curriculum of the legal education
system in Indonesia called the curriculum based on the Indonesian National Qualification Framework,
which is targeted to improve the quality of college graduates. This curriculum on the National Job
Training System is codified based on the Presidential Regulation Number 8 the Year 2012 for the
implementation of Article 5(3) Government Regulation Number 31 the Year 2006. The presumption is
that university graduates are ready to enter the workforce, including graduates of law faculties.32
The role of legal education in furthering national interests has been enshrined in legal education
systems. If examined further, the existence of the Indonesian National Qualification Framework
curriculum follows the history of a relationship that is not autonomous and is closely tied to the success
of the ruling government at that time, as shown in Table 2.
The curriculum from the colonial era until the early reform period was still heavily influenced by the
authorities’ interests. For example, in the colonial era, the purpose of legal education was to produce
graduates who could become colonial legal officers, and the curriculum was adjusted to further this
goal.33
When Indonesia gained its independence, the aim of legal education was oriented to support the
agenda of Soekarno’s revolution in the spirit of decolonization—an attempt to dismantle colonial laws.
When the Old Order regime fell and was replaced by the New Order, legal education was directed to
support the economic development agenda. Despite such pressures to kowtow to the government,
campuses have tried to promote innovation by reforming the legal education curriculum, integrating the
legal curriculum with the Tridharma of Higher Education. For example, and importantly, the dharma of
community service can be realized by providing legal services to disadvantaged people through legal
clinic activities.34 Leaders have recognized the importance of autonomous legal education.

Table 2.  The Dynamics of the Indonesian Law Education Goals35

Sl. No. Government Law Education Goals

1 Colonial era
2 Old Order
3 New Order
4 Reformation era
5 Post-reformation era
Source: Atmadja (1993).
Become a government employee (ambtenaar)
Support the revolution agenda to decolonize—dismantle all the colonial laws
Support economic development
Think progressively
Understand the law theory, be able to implement it and have character as well.

32
  Maria Ulfah, Clinical Legal Education in the Legal Aid Institution Faculty of Law, Universitas Katolik Parahyangan, 12
Pandecta Res. Law J. 39–50 (2017).
33
  Ylbhi, Panduan Bantuan Hukum Di Indonesia: Pedoman Anda Memahami Dan Menyelesaikan Masalah Hukum (Herlambang
Yasin & Muhammad Perdana eds., 2014).
34
  Atmadja, supra note 9. See also, Juwana, supra note 8.
35
  Atmadja, supra note 9. See also, Juwana, supra note 8. See also, Ulfah, supra note 31.
60 Asian Journal of Legal Education 8(1)

The introduction of the Indonesian National Qualification Framework curriculum is hoped to

improve the quality of higher education alumni, including law graduates. The Indonesian National
Qualification Framework curriculum design focuses on strengthening student competencies and is
oriented towards learning outcomes, using multiple educational methods. The CLE method can be a
practical solution to translating the vision of the Indonesian National Qualification Framework
curriculum to actual course instruction.36 CLE is seen as directly relevant to the Indonesian National
Qualification Framework curriculum, reinforcing the importance of soft skills and application of
knowledge to real cases and problems. CLE combines three aspects at once: broad knowledge of legal
subject matter, the skills to apply the law in concrete cases and practise in court and character-building,
namely student awareness of social justice in society, especially regarding communities that cannot
afford legal representation.37 Combining these three aspects will lead students to become elite legal
professionals and create a balance between ‘legal business’ in corporate law and the demands for
service to people who are unable to gain access to justice in the cases they face through legal assistance
provided by a lawyer.

CLE Implementation Method in the Law School System

Given the lack of national curriculum rules, universities enjoy a great deal of flexibility in implementing
CLE. Campus clinic managers are tasked to implement their universities’ CLE programmes and largely
refer to the clinical management standards that already exist in many campuses around the globe, as well
as clinical manuals compiled by Indonesian legal partners as non-campus parties that have been actively
promoting CLE since 2010.38 Because of this flexibility, implementation and the appurtenant perceptions
also vary widely from campus to campus, as along with the programme structure, the substance of the
CLE programme also differs.
The substance of Indonesian CLE programmes follows one or more of the following three paths:
street law, other advocacy methods and internships. This diversity of methodology affects the benefits to
students and lecturers. Street law has a positive effect on students’ soft skills, including communication
techniques and collaborative learning, while advocacy has an impact on increasing students’ ability to
apply the law they learn to concrete cases. In contrast, internships develop professional skills, such as the
ability to manage clients and case traffic in a lawyer’s office. Regardless, however, of the substance and
structure of a CLE programme, each implementation of CLE demands university cooperation with CLE
partners. Campuses must establish partnerships with various stakeholders to realize the objectives of
each CLE programme.

36
  Christin Septina Basani, Kurikulum Nasional yang Berbasis Kompetensi Perguruan Tinggi dengan Mengacu pada Kerangk
Kualifikasi Nasional Indonesia (KKNI) untuk Menghasilkan Kualitas Manusia yang Kompeten dan Berdaya Saing, 7 J. Huk.
Bisnis dan Investasi 1689–99 (2017).
37
  The University of New South Wales, The Clinical Movement in Southeast Asia and India: A Comparative Perspective and
Lessons to be Learned (2009). See also, Ylbhi, supra note 32.
38
  Uli Parulian Sihombing et al., Mengelola Legal Clinic: Panduan Membentuk dan Mengembangkan LBH Kampus untuk
Memperkuat Akses Keadilan (Mitra Pembaruan Pendidikan Hukum Indonesia, 2009). See also, ILRC, supra note 14. See also,
Schrag & Schrag, supra note 29.
Arifin et al. 61

CLE Implementation
The diversity in perceptions and implementations of CLE among law faculties in Indonesia also
affects the teaching–learning process, as shown in Table 3. CLE implementation is generally limited
to 3 credit hours for one semester. Some programmes only give certificates of completion, to establish
CLE practice, and others give grades to existing courses but use the CLE method. Of course, the
difference in the adoption of CLE across legal education systems has varying impacts on students’
needs, especially the skills needed in the development of identity and skills in using their legal
knowledge in society.
The data in Table 3 also show the diversity in CLE implementation, including street law. Students
have opportunities to teach law to school communities or specific groups of traditionally disadvan-
taged populations, such as those with disabilities, women and micro, small and medium enterprises
(MSMEs). In the street law method, the design of activities can be adjusted to meet various communi-
ties’ needs.39
True CLE programmes allow students to work with live clients and provide legal consultation and
legal advocacy. This method helps them fully use their lawyering skills. Students are taught how to put
into practice the legal knowledge gained in class and gain the ability to analyse the law critically, while
thinking like a lawyer.40 The live-client method in practice is carried out either on campus or off campus,
with internships at legal clinics in cooperation partner entities. This ability to essentially practise law has
a positive effect on students’ knowledge and expertise, because they will gain experience as lawyers and
professionals, which could allow graduates to hit the ground running in the legal field.41

Table 3.  CLE Implementation in the Indonesian Law School

Methods of implementation 1.  Street law

2.  Advocacy and supervision
3.  Consultation
4.  Field trip
5.  Case study
6.  Internship
Steps to implementation 1. Open recruitment
2. Lecturer training
3. Socialization of students
4. Students’ training
5. MoU with external institutions
Recognition by school 1. Certificate award
2. Reward point
3. Credit course (3 credits)
4. Value of courses
Source: Processed from primary data, June 2020.

39
  Lydia et al., Bleasdale, The Clinical Legal Education Handbook (Nick Thom andas & Johnson Linden, ed., 2020).
40
  Amy D. Ronner, The Learned-helpless Lawyer: Clinical Legal Education and Therapeutic Jurisprudence as Antidotes to
Bartleby Syndrome, 24 Touro Law Rev. (2013). See also, Kreiling, supra note 12. See also, Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like A
Lawyer (Harvard University Press, 2009).
41
  Barnhizer, supra note 13. See also, Kreiling, supra note 12.
62 Asian Journal of Legal Education 8(1)

Steps to Successfully Implementing CLE Programmes

The ultimate success of a particular CLE programme is directly tied to the roll-out of the programme.
The preparation generally focuses on three stakeholders: lecturers, students and partners. Lecturers must
train to supervise CLE programmes. In the CLE method, lecturers have a great deal of responsibility to
supervise all CLE processes carried out by students, from preparation to completion of CLE activities.
Therefore, the implementation should be carried out through the collaboration of all CLE-supporting
lecturers.
The other preparation that is no less important concerns the students themselves as the primary
beneficiaries of CLE programs. The minimum prerequisite are the core legal science courses. Therefore,
most students who take part in the clinical programmes will have completed four semesters. In semester
five, students are generally considered to have sufficient foundational legal knowledge. CLE, however,
should be an elective course, but open to all students. There should also be a selection process, as CLE
programmes demand a strong commitment by the participants, so that only those who have a strong
desire to join the CLE programme can enter.42 This commitment is usually driven also by the strong
desire of students to become legal practitioners.
In contrast, students who do not aspire to become legal practitioners have less interest in CLE. Such
students, termed academic learners, enter law faculties for numerous reasons apart from plans to enter
the legal profession.43 They are concerned more with understanding legal theories well than with how to
practise it in concrete cases. This group became the target of criticism from Adrian Bedner, who claimed
that they only learn about what the law is and the legal principles but do not know how to apply the law
in real life.44 This concern applies less to the legal education system in Indonesia, where undergraduate
law study is far different from law schools in the United States.

The Advantages of CLE

Regardless of the motivation for implementing and participating in CLE, all parties, students, lecturers,
campuses and communities, benefit from such programmes. The data in Table 4 illustrate the potential
benefits for the parties involved. Most obviously, students are enriched by the experience of directly
learning in the community, developing the ability to practise the legal knowledge gained on campus in
concrete cases in the community. These practical experiences affect all aspects of their legal skills and
other soft skills not easily acquired on campus, such as increased self-confidence, the ability to
communicate with the broader community and sensitivity to the sense of social justice. Another benefit
felt by students is the opening of networks with the broader community outside campus.
Because the law, in principle, is a profession, it teaches professional responsibility to students and to
think like lawyers. It is not enough to only teach in the classroom. Students who are taught through
directly dealing with concrete cases in the field, under the supervision of their superior, are more
rounded.45

42
  Schrag & Schrag, supra note 29.
43
  Juwana, supra note 8. See also, Muchammad et all., Zaidun, Mengajarkan Hukum yang Berkeadilan: Cetak Biru Pembaharuan
Pendidikan Hukum Berbasis Keadilan Sosial (Uli Parulian at all. Sihombing ed., 2009).
44
  Bedner, supra note 3.
45
  Barnhizer, supra note 13. See also, Schauer, supra note 40.
Arifin et al. 63

Relating to the benefits of CLE for students, Schrag outlines some essential skills that students need
to develop as the objectives of CLE programmes46:

 1. Responsibility
  2. Doctrine and institutions
 3. Service
 4. Problem-solving
 5. Collaboration
  6. Cross-cultural awareness
  7. The role of emotions
  8. Coping with facts
 9. Values
10. Ethics
11. Creativity
12. Authority
13. Learning to learn
14. Traditional skills
15. Students’ goals

What Schrag describes is broader than what was found through the research in Indonesia. The
identification carried out by Schrag is comprehensive, including the benefits of knowledge, practical
experience, professional work, soft student skills and ethical values to be obtained during the CLE
implementation process. One important goal of CLE is professional responsibility, although not all
clinics focus on this goal. A clinic orientates its objectives towards teaching research and writing skills.47
Bruce A. Lasky further explained that in CLE, there are three integrated goals: legal knowledge, skills in
applying the law in the community and values, especially social justice in the community through direct
interaction between students and the community.48
In addition to the benefits availed by students, lecturers who manage and direct student development
also enhance their abilities and experiences through CLE. Instructors broaden their impact and ability by
demonstrating professionalism to students. Lecturers become more interactive and develop empirical
teaching methods, such as the distribution of community service media as part of the obligations of the
Tridharma of Higher Education, which was the initial goal of CLE adopted in the legal education system
in Indonesia around the 1970s.49 Another benefit is that lecturers increase their academic networks not
only at the national level but also internationally. This benefit is further strengthened by the creation of
a global network of CLE teachers and researchers under an association called the Global Alliance for
Justice Education (GAJE). This association brings together all CLE teachers and researchers from
various law schools with diverse country backgrounds.50
Another benefit of CLE for lecturers is the collaborative teaching model. Schrag stresses that teaching
CLE must be at least collegial, even with one person. This method is vital because CLE presents many
new challenges, and a team of lecturers is needed to share roles and solve problems. In fact, according to

46
  Schrag & Schrag, supra note 29.
47
  Id.
48
  BABSEA, supra note 12.
49
  Atmadja, supra note 9.
50
  Bloch, supra note 10. See also, Munger et al., supra note 25.
64 Asian Journal of Legal Education 8(1)

Table 4.  The Advantages of CLE for Students, Lecturers, Schools and Society

Sl. No. Beneficiaries Nature of Benefit

1 Students
2 Lecturers
3 Campuses
4 Society
Source: Primary data collected through interview with five CLE lecturers from difference law schools.
1. Form a network with outside parties
2. Are trained in public communication
3. Practise legal knowledge and skills
4. Gain hands-on experience and can contribute directly to the community
5. Develop empathy for community legal issues
6. Are more open in analysing situations
7. Are more confident when speaking in public
1. Are not challenged in finding or making reports on community service
2. Know new learning methods
3. Increase their knowledge and implement knowledge related to interactive
teaching methods
4. Gain the opportunity to participate in cooperation
1. The faculty are indirectly promoted among the public.
2. The (cooperation) link is wide open at the regional, national, and international
levels.
The public feel helped by the clinic’s activities, especially with respect to accessing
justice and understanding the legal norms that apply in Indonesia.

Schrag, ideally, there must be one professor who acts as a clinical coordinator, who can be the point
person for all CLE issues, including fostering new lecturers.51
The broader campus also reaps the excellent benefits of promotion among its many stakeholders and
the wider community. The campus itself will build a network of cooperation as a means to build
partnerships in the implementation of CLE. These partnerships are necessary, because realizing optimal
CLE without supporting partners will be challenging.52
Additionally, the community also benefits from a CLE programme. The people understand the legal
problems they face in their daily lives, and they also get access to social justice in the legal cases they are
involved in.53 The community receives solutions to solve its normally occurring legal problems, which
previously could only be addressed by those who had the financial capacity to pay lawyers. CLE
programmes provide pro bono services or free legal aid services among disadvantaged populations,
either organized by lawyers as a form of corporate social responsibility or through legal assistance
provided by the state as a constitutional responsibility.54

51
  Schrag & Schrag, supra note 29.
52
  Hamzah, Curriculum and Instructional Challenges in Clinical Legal Education of Indonesian Law Schools: Breaking the
Legacy, 9 J. Soc. Stud. Educ. Res. 215–25 (2018). See also, Bhimaraya A. Metri, Disaster Mitigation Framework for India Using
Quality Circle Approach, 15 Disaster Prev. Manag. An Int. J. 621–35 (2006). See also, D. Bonilla, Legal Clinics in the Global
North and South: Between Equality and Subordination-An Essay, 16 Yale Hum. Rights Dev. Law J. (2013). See also, Barnhizer,
supra note 13.
53
  Zaidun, supra note 43. See also, ILRC, supra note 14. See also, Scott L. Munger et al., Mobilizing Law for Justice in Asia: A
Comparative Approach, 31 Wisconsin Int. Law J. 353–420 (2013).
54
  Saru Arifin, Commitment of Local Government in Providing Legal Aid for the Poor Society, 16 J. Din. Huk. 8–16 (2016). See
also, Ispurwandoko Susilo, Kedudukan Laboratorium Klinik dan Bantuan Hukum Dalam Mengemban Tri Dharma Perguruan
Tinggi (Studi Kasus Pada Fakultas Hukum Uncen), 1 Papua Law J. 237–52 (2017). See also, Ylbhi, supra note 32.
Arifin et al. 65

Conclusion
The implementation of CLE in Indonesia, while undeniably valuable, remains a patchwork of divergent
models across campuses. Some campuses have adopted CLE in their curriculum with credit values,
while others have made CLE only an extracurricular activity. Consequently, the CLE method used also
varies—the street law, advocacy and internship methods are used; the diversity in the CLE adoption
models and the methods of applying it affects the learning outcomes. The street law method improves
students’ soft skills, especially their public communication skills.
In comparison, the advocacy method influences students to apply their law skills in concrete cases.
Further, the internship method provides students the ability to form an extensive collaboration network
in the community. The differences in the adoption and implementation of CLE in the legal education
system in Indonesia are because CLE has not been formally endorsed by the law faculty association as a
standard method. Therefore, this article suggests that CLE objectives will be more effectively achieved
through the standardization of CLE in the Indonesian legal education curriculum, such as in the credit
value system, the method of implementation followed in technical training.

Acknowledgement
The research forming the foundation for this article was funded by the Faculty of Law, Semarang State University,
Central Java, Indonesia, under the scheme of Research Grants 2020. Special thanks go to the Dean of Law School
and Dr Dewi Sulastyaningsih and the team of the research and public service centre of the Faculty of Law, Semarang
State University, for all their support. Last, author wish to thank to Christoper Cason who helped a lot to improve
this article. Thank you for your comments and critics to the draft of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of
this article.

Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.