Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues Volume 24, Issue 3, 2021 1 1544-0044-24-3-606 FROM JUDGE’S DECISION TO JUSTICE: THE ROLE OF TRANSCENDENTAL LAW TO REINFORCE JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE Hamidah Abdurrachman, Universitas Pancasakti Tegal Achmad Irwan Hamzani, Universitsa Pancasakti Tegal Nayla Majestya, School of Design Bina Nusantara University Havis Aravik, Stebis IGM, Palembang ABSTRACT Judges have freedom and independence in deciding cases. The judge's authority can have an impact on different interpretations in deciding cases with the same legal source. Judges need to be equipped with transcendental values as a source of reasoning. The purpose of this research is to examine the concept of independence and freedom of judges in making decisions, and to examine the contribution of transcendental law as an effort towards a fair judge's verdict. This study uses a philosophical approach, which examines the future judge's decision from the ideal point of view. The data used are secondary data with qualitative data analysis techniques. The research findings show that the judicial power is the power of an independent state to administer the judiciary in order to uphold law and justice for the implementation of a rule of law. Judge is a core element who exercises judicial power. The judicial power is obliged to maintain the independence of the judiciary through the integrity and the freedom of judges in examining and deciding cases. Judges must be equipped with the value of transcendental law. Traditional knowledge is the clearest gateway to confirming the Absolute Reality and getting out of materialism. Transcendental becomes a source of rational reasoning and empiricism as well as diversity and humanity with an inner awareness of God and the universe. Keywords: Independent, Judge's Decision, Transcendental, Justice. INTRODUCTION Disparity is the common problem that always appears in the verdicts of judges’ decisions every year. The disparity in decisions is a serious problem because it involves the value of justice to be achieved from a punishment. In fact, the existence of criminal disparities implies that there is an injustice in judges’ decisions given to the defendents. Although disparities cannot be eliminated, the gaps that arise from punishment can be reduced or minimized. The existence of differences in convictions or disparities in sentencing is common. It is caused by differenct characteristics of each case or is not the same as one another. The problems arise when a similar case or a case that has similarities or characteristics has a big different gap in the verdict, for example a case with the same state losses or the actors involved have the same position, and so on.