Batas Koersi Negara dan Hak Individu: Perbandingan Libertarianisme Robert Nozick dan Konstitusionalisme Islam Abdullahi Ahmed An-Naʿim

Raihan Aditya; Rahmat Hidayatullah; Bustamin Bustamin

doi:10.15408/paradigma.v8i1.46921

Authors

Raihan Aditya UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta
Rahmat Hidayatullah UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta
Bustamin UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15408/paradigma.v8i1.46921

Keywords:

individual rights, state coercion, Robert Nozick, An-Naʿim, constitutionalism

Abstract

This article compares Robert Nozick and Abdullahi Ahmed An-Naʿim on individual rights and the limits of state coercion. This library-based study employs a comparative conceptual analysis of Anarchy, State, and Utopia and Islam and the Secular State. The findings demonstrate that both thinkers restrict coercive state power, although they rely on different foundations and protect different domains. Nozick understands rights as side constraints grounded in self-ownership; the state may therefore neither impose redistributive arrangements nor pursue paternalistic objectives. An-Naʿim grounds rights in equal citizenship, constitutionalism, and human rights; the state may therefore not enforce religious doctrine as public law. Unlike Nozick’s minimal state, however, An-Naʿim retains a broader state role in protecting equality and social justice. The article identifies two models of limiting coercion: Nozick’s proprietary-rights model and An-Naʿim’s citizenship-rights model.

References

An-Naʿim, Abdullahi Ahmed. Decolonizing Human Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021.

———. Islam and the Secular State: Negotiating the Future of Shari‘a. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008.

———. “Religion, the State, and Constitutionalism in Islamic and Comparative Perspectives.” Drake Law Review 57, no. 4 (2009): 829–850.

———. Toward an Islamic Reformation: Civil Liberties, Human Rights, and International Law. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1990.

———, ed. Human Rights in Cross-Cultural Perspectives: A Quest for Consensus. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992.

Atmadewi, Katrin. “Eksistensi Hak Individu dalam Bernegara: Kajian Filosofis Pemikiran Robert Nozick dalam Kehidupan Bernegara.” Skripsi, Universitas Indonesia, 2009.

Bader, Ralf M., dan John Meadowcroft, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Nozick’s Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Baderin, Mashood A. “Engaging with Abdullahi An-Naʿim’s Philosophy on Islam and Human Rights.” Emory International Law Review 36, no. 4 (2022): 605–635.

Brennan, Jason. Libertarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.

Fadel, Mohammad. “Islamic Politics and Secular Politics: Can They Co-Exist?” Journal of Law and Religion 25, no. 1 (2009): 101–118.

Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government. Diedit oleh Peter Laslett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Mack, Eric. “Robert Nozick’s Political Philosophy.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nozick-political/.

Nozick, Robert. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2012.

Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Edisi revisi. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.

Salahuddin, Asif. “Robert Nozick’s Entitlement Theory of Justice, Libertarian Rights and the Minimal State: A Critical Evaluation.” Journal of Civil & Legal Sciences 7, no. 1 (2018): artikel 234.

Wolff, Jonathan. Robert Nozick: Property, Justice, and the Minimal State. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1991.