Judicial Preview on the Bill on International Treaty Ratification

Noor Sidharta; Sudarsono Sudarsono; I Nyoman Nurjaya; Bambang Sugiri

doi:10.31078/consrev312

Judicial Preview on the Bill on International Treaty Ratification

Constitutional Review ◽

10.31078/consrev312 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 3 (1) ◽

pp. 24

Author(s):

Noor Sidharta ◽

Sudarsono Sudarsono ◽

I Nyoman Nurjaya ◽

Bambang Sugiri

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Judicial Review ◽

The State ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

International Treaty ◽

State Institutions ◽

Treaty Ratification ◽

Administrative Practice ◽

State Administration ◽

The Republic

This research is aimed to find and introduce a new idea on the state administration, which has implications on the international treaty ratification procedure followed by Indonesia and additional authorizations of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The judicial preview in this research is an international treaty examination procedure by the Constitutional Court before an international treaty is transformed into a law, i.e. such international treaty is a Bill. The judicial preview shall have different terms in each country, such as Review ex ante, abstract review, judicial review. This procedure is applied when an international treaty has not been validated as a country’s national law. The benefits of a judicial preview shall be a solution to connect an ambiguity between the state administrative law and international law. The judicial preview is also the inter-state institutions real check and balance on the international treaty. Out of benchmarking results of four countries following the monism doctrine, i.e. Russia, Germany, France, and Italty and two countries following the dualism doctrine, i.e. Hungary and Ecuador, several additional authorizations of the Constitutional Court shall be summarized, i.e. via the Amendment of 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and/or regulations via laws. If both manners are not possible, the Constitutional Court may apply the judicial preview as a state administrative practice. An international treaty draft, which has passed through the judicial preview, may not be submitted to the Constitutional Court to be performed a judicial review, unless 5 (five) year-period has passed since the bill is enacted as a law.

Download Full-text

Laws of Ratification of an International Treaty in Indonesian Laws Hierarchy

Constitutional Review ◽

10.31078/consrev322 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 3 (2) ◽

pp. 171

Author(s):

Noor Sidharta

Keyword(s):

Judicial Review ◽

Legal Status ◽

Journal Article ◽

Primary Data ◽

Research Approach ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

International Treaties ◽

International Treaty ◽

State Administration ◽

The Republic

This journal article discusses the laws of ratification of an international treaty in Indonesian laws hierarchy. This journal uses a normative research approach where a draft agreement and laws are used as primary data apart from the laws and international treaties. There are some issues that still unsettled related to the legal status of the laws of ratification of an international treaty that have impacts in the implementation of the treaty. The laws of ratification of an international treaty now is still classified as general laws whose the content of the norm has been discussed by the People’s Representatives Council, therefore the laws of ratification of an international treaty automatically become the object of Judicial Review at the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The cancellation of the laws of ratification of an international treaty impacts the cancellation of the deal on the treaty and it has failed the pacta sunt servanda principle, which becomes the basis of a treaty. To solve problems related to the cancellation of laws of ratification of an international treaty at the Constitutional Court, there are several efforts on state administration by classifying the laws which differ the general laws from the laws whose contents are related to the international treaty. Furthermore, a progressive new method on the state administration is needed by giving a Judicial Preview right to the Constitutional Court to conduct a review on the bill of the ratification of an international treaty based on its suitability to the constitution.

Download Full-text

Hukum Internasional sebagai Alat Interpretasi dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang

Jurnal Konstitusi ◽

10.31078/jk1514 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 15 (1) ◽

pp. 73

Author(s):

Umbu Rauta ◽

Ninon Melatyugra

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Review Process ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Legal Research ◽

Conceptual Approach ◽

The Republic ◽

Constitutional Tradition ◽

The Relationship

Tulisan ini ingin menjawab dua isu utama mengenai hubungan hukum internasional dan pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi RI (MKRI). Isu pertama adalah legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai alat interpretasi dalam pengujian undang-undang, sedangkan isu kedua adalah urgensi penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MKRI. Tulisan ini merupakan penelitian hukum yang menggunakan pendekatan konseptual dan pendekatan historis dalam menjelaskan perkembangan pengujian undang-undang di Indonesia sekaligus menemukan legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional oleh MK RI. Kesimpulan dari tulisan ini menegaskan bahwa hukum internasional memiliki sumbangsih yang penting dalam perannya sebagai alat interpretasi dalam proses pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi, khususnya terkait hak asasi manusia. Justifikasi keabsahan praktik penggunaan hukum internasional tersebut ditarik dari tradisi ketatanegaraan yang secara implisit dikehendaki UUD NRI Tahun 1945. Manfaat positif yang diberikan hukum internasional nyatanya harus disertai juga dengan penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MK RI supaya hukum internasional dapat digunakan secara tepat. Pembahasan dalam tulisan ini dibagi ke dalam empat sub bahasan inti yakni, pengujian undang-undang, penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai the interpretative tool dalam pengujian undang-undang oleh MK, legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai the interpretative tool dalam pengujian undang-undang, pentingnya penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MK.This article intentionally answers two principal issues regarding the relationship between international law and judicial review by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The first issue is the legitimacy of international use as an interpretative tool in judicial review. The second issue talks about the necessity of urgent international law mastery by the Constitutional Court’s judges. This legal research utilizes both a conceptual approach and a historical approach to explain the development of judicial review in Indonesia, and to find legitimacy of international law by the Constitutional Court. The analysis in this article affirms that international law positively contributes as an interpretative tool in judicial review by the Constitutional Court, particularly pertaining to human rights. A justification of a legitimate international law use is withdrawn from constitutional tradition which is implicitly desired by the Indonesian Constitution (UUD NRI 1945). Since international law has provided better insights into norms, a mastery of international law should be encouraged. There are four main discussions in this article: judicial review, application of international law in judicial review process, legitimacy of international law application in judicial review, and the importance of international law mastering by Constitutional Court judges.

Download Full-text

THE “DEFERENCE” OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY TO THE STATE*

Obiter ◽

10.17159/obiter.v33i1.12185 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 33 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Nomthandazo Ntlama

Keyword(s):

South Africa ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Separation Of Powers ◽

The State ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Main Function ◽

Checks And Balances ◽

New Process ◽

State Authority ◽

The Republic

The adoption of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (hereinafter “the Constitution”), provided an opportune moment for the courts, especially the Constitutional Court to ensure an appropriate balance in the development of the principles and values of the doctrine of separation of powers vis-à-vis those of judicial review. The Constitution is framed in a manner that entrenches a system of checks and balances (this is deduced from the manner in which the various chapters of the Constitution are structured, dealing with the roles of the legislature, executive and the judiciary). This system gives the general public a legislative and executive authority that is accountable to them subject to judicial review by an independent judiciary. The system of checks and balances affirms the limited power of the legislative and executive authorities which is confined within the constraints of constitutional values and principles. The importance of checks and balances is similarly endorsed by Edwards as a system that has ushered in a new process of the regulation of state authority in the new dawn of democracy. This system envisages a move away from a culture of authority of the apartheid rule to one of justification of the new constitutional dispensation. He substantiates his argument by pointing out that the new process of regulating state authority has enabled the courts to educate other branches of government through principled and robust articulations of the foundational and constitutional values of the Constitution in a democratic society. Against this background, the purpose of this note is to provide a brief overview of the Merafong Demarcation Forum v President of the Republic of South Africa (2008 (10) BCLR 968, hereinafter “Merafong”) judgment. The particular emphasis on this judgment is its potential to defer the judicialauthority (which the author refer to as a “political doctrine”) to the state. The objective is to analyse this doctrine and evaluate it against the development of substantive principles of judicial review. This purpose is motivated by Chaskalson CJ’s argument in Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of South Africa: In re Ex Parte President of the Republic of South Africa (2000 (3) BCLR 241). Chaskalson CJ in this case held that the Constitutional Court cannot allow itself to be diverted from its main function as the final andindependent arbiter in the contest between the state and its citizens. In Merafong, the court created an impression of having misconstrued this purpose and the objectives it has to fulfil. This note is limited to the “political approach” which the court emphasisedwithout much thought, and attempt to address the question of public involvement in legislative processes raised in this case. It alsoacknowledges that the court has affirmed its independence as the guardian of the Constitution in the regulation of state authority and advancement of the principles of judicial review, but its lack of consistency in its adopted approach is a worrying factor and a causefor concern for the regulation of state authority.

Download Full-text

KAJIAN NORMATIF MENGENAI HUBUNGAN ANTAR LEMBAGA NEGARA DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN REPUBLIK INDONESIA BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG DASAR TAHUN 1945: SEBELUM DAN SESUDAH AMANDEMEN

Hukum dan Masyarakat Madani ◽

10.26623/humani.v6i1.855 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 6 (1) ◽

pp. 75

Author(s):

Tri Mulyani

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Descriptive Analysis ◽

Vice President ◽

The State ◽

State Agency ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

State Institutions ◽

The Republic ◽

The Government ◽

The Relationship

Negara Indonesia adalah Negara hukum, artinya bahwa negara yang menempatkan hukum sebagai dasar kekuasaan negara dan penyelenggaraan kekuasaan tersebut dalam segala bentuknya dilakukan di bawah kekuasaan hukum. Sifat dari negara hukum hanya dapat ditunjukkan apabila alat-alat perlengkapan negara yaitu lembaga-lembaga negara bertindak menurut dan terikat kepada aturan-aturan yang telah ditetapkan. Lembaga Tinggi Negara yang dimaksud dalam penelitian ini adalah Lembaga Tinggi Negara yang nama, fungsi dan kewenanganya dibentuk berdasarkan Konstitusi atau Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 yaitu: Presiden dan Wakil Presiden, Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah, Mahkamah Agung, Mahkamah Konstitusi, dan Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan. Sehubungan dengan dasar pembentukan Lembaga Tinggi Negara adalah Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945, dan telah mengalami amandemen 4 kali maka struktur dan hubungan mereka dalam menjalakan tugas pemerintahan dari sebelum dan sesudah amandemen tentunya juga mengalami perubahan. Dengan pendekatan yuridis normatif, dan uraian yang diskriptif analisis, ditemukan jawaban bahwa struktur lembaga negara beserta hubungan diantara lembaga negara telah mengalami pergeseran setelah dilakukan amandemen. Pada dasarnya hubungan diantara lembaga negara tidak banyak mengalami perubahan. Namun perubahan itu justru tampak dalam struktur lembaga negaranya. Sebelum amandemen struktur lembaga negara terdiri dari MPR sebagai lembaga tertinggi, Presiden, DPR, DPA, BPK dan MA. Namun setelah dilakukan amandemen lembaga negara berkembang yaitu MPR, DPR, DPD, Presiden, MA, MK, dan BPK. Perbedaanya ada dipoint pengapusan istilah lembaga tertinggi, sehingga semua menjadi lembaga tinggi negara. Indonesia is a country of law, meaning that the country as the law is the basis of state power and the implementation of the power in all its forms is done under the rule of law. The nature of the state law can only be shown if the scientific equipment is state state institutions and bound to act according to the rules that have been set. State Agency referred to in this research is the State Agency name, function and an arbitrary set up under the Constitution or the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945, namely: President and Vice-President, People's Consultative Assembly, the House of Representatives, Regional Representatives Council, The Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court, and the Supreme Audit Agency. In connection with establishing the State Agency is the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945, and has undergone amendments 4 times the structures and their relationship to run the task of the government before and after the amendment would also change. With normative juridical approach, and a description of the descriptive analysis, found the answer that the structure of state institutions as well as the relationship between the state institutions have experienced a shift after the amendment. Basically the relationship between the state institutions has not changed much. But it is precisely looked into the institutional structure of the country. Prior to the amendment of the structure of state institutions consist of the Assembly as the highest institution, President, Parliament, DPA, BPK and MA. However, after the amendment of the developing state institutions, namely the MPR, DPR, DPD, President, Supreme Court, Constitutional Court, and the CPC. No difference dipoint term elimination highest institution, so all became state institutions.

Download Full-text

Relevansi Putusan Uji Materi oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi terhadap Sistem Checks and Balances dalam Pembentukan Undang-Undang

Undang Jurnal Hukum ◽

10.22437/ujh.2.2.353-379 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2 (2) ◽

pp. 353-379

Author(s):

Despan Heryansyah ◽

Harry Setya Nugraha

Keyword(s):

Rule Of Law ◽

Judicial Review ◽

House Of Representatives ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Checks And Balances ◽

The Rule Of Law ◽

State Institutions ◽

The Republic

This article discusses the relevance of the judicial review decision by the Constitutional Court to the checks and balances system in law legislation in Indonesia. In the framework of checks and balances between state institutions, the existence of the authority of the Constitutional Court to examine laws against the Constitution can be seen as a limitation for the legislators. This is because the discretion of legislators, namely the President and the House of Representatives, in carrying out the legislation function can be limited by the interpretation of the Constitution carried out by the Constitutional Court. This article concludes, the checks and balances mechanism regulated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia is realized with the principle of power limited by power. Therefore, the authority and decision of the judicial review by the Constitutional Court is not an intervention on the authority of lawmakers so that it isi assumed to pass the checks and belances principle. The authority and decision of the judicial review by the Constitutional Court actually confirms the manifestation of the principle of power limited by power and affirming the supremacy of the Constitution. Thus, the principle of supremacy of the Constitution in the context of the rule of law places the Constitution as the highest law. Abstrak Artikel ini membahas relevansi putusan uji materi oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi terhadap sistem checks and balances dalam pembentukan hukum berupa undang-undang di Indonesia. Dalam kerangka checks and balances antar lembaga negara, adanya kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi menguji undang-undang terhadap Konstitusi dapat dipandang sebagai suatu pembatasan bagi pembentuk undang-undang. Sebab, keleluasaan pembentuk undang-undang, yaitu Presiden dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, dalam menjalankan fungsi legislasi bisa dibatasi oleh adanya tafsir Konstitusi yang dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi. Artikel ini menyimpulkan, mekanisme checks and balances yang diatur dalam Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 diwujudkan dengan prinsip kekuasaan dibatasi oleh kekuasaan. Karena itu, kewenangan dan putusan uji materi oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi bukanlah wujud intervensi terhadap kewenangan pembentuk undang-undang dan melampaui prinsip checks and balances. Kewenangan dan putusan uji materi oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi justru menegaskan wujud dari prinsip kekuasaan dibatasi kekuasaan dan meneguhkan supremasi Konstitusi. Demikianlah, prinsip supremasi Konstitusi dalam konteks negara hukum yang menempatkan Konstitusi sebagai hukum tertinggi.

Download Full-text

Fenomena Two in One Pengujian Perppu

Jurnal Konstitusi ◽

10.31078/jk1522 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 15 (2) ◽

pp. 257

Author(s):

Iskandar Muda

Keyword(s):

Judicial Review ◽

Government Regulation ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Legal Procedure ◽

State Institutions ◽

The Third ◽

The Republic ◽

The Government ◽

Legislative Review ◽

Legal Procedures

Dua lembaga negara sama-sama berwenang menguji Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang (Perppu); Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR) “berwenang” berdasarkan Pasal 22 ayat (2) dan ayat (3) Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia 1945, sedangkan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) berdasarkan putusannya No. 138/PUU-VII/2009 menyatakan “berwenang pula.” Dengan adanya dua lembaga negara yang mempunyai kewenangan yang sama tersebut maka (dapat) terjadi fenomena. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum dengan menggunakan pendekatan normatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa ada tiga bentuk fenomena Two in One Pengujian Perppu yang (dapat) terjadi. Pertama, “judicial examination for constitutionality to Perppu pre-legislative review.” Kedua, “judicial examination for constitutionality to Perppu post-legislative review.” Ketiga, jika terjadi judicial review Perppu di MK baik dalam keadaan bentuk fenomena pertama atau fenomena kedua tetapi dalam waktu yang berlarut-larut DPR tidak memberikan keputusan tidak menyetujui atau menyetujui Perppu menjadi undang-undang. Prosedur hukum untuk bentuk fenomena kedua tidak jauh berbeda dengan prosedur hukum fenomena bentuk pertama; prosedur hukum serta yang dijadikan dasar pertimbangannya mempunyai kesamaan. Sedangkan prosedur hukum untuk bentuk fenomena ketiga perlu pula dikaji lebih lanjut secara mendalam untuk mencapai titik temu oleh dua pihak (DPR dan MK) yang berwenang menguji Perppu. Bentuk fenomena dan prosedur hukum pertama dan kedua bisa dikatakan sebagai jenis kewenangan yang bersifat pasif. Sedangkan bentuk fenomena dan prosedur hukum yang ketiga bisa dikatakan sebagai jenis kewenangan yang bersifat aktif.Two state institutions are equally authorized to test the Government Regulation in Lieu of Laws (Perppu); The House of Representatives (DPR) is “authorized” based on Article 22 paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, while the Constitutional Court (MK) based on its verdict No. 138/PUU-VII/2009 declared “authorized as well.” With the existence of two state institutions that have the same authority, then the phenomena (can) happen. This research is a legal research using normative approach. The results of the study showed that there are three forms of phenomena of Two in One Perppu review which (can) happened. First, “judicial examination for the constitutionality to Perppu pre-legislative review.” Second, “judicial examination for the constitutionality to Perppu post-legislative review.” Third, in the case of Perppu judicial review in the Constitutional Court, either in the form of the first phenomenon or the second phenomenon, yet in the long period the DPR does not give a decision whether to approve the Perppu or not into the law. The legal procedure for the form of the second phenomenon is not much different from the legal procedure of the first form phenomenon; legal procedures and the basis of their considerations are merely the same. While the legal procedure for the third form of the phenomenon should also be studied further in depth to reach the final point by two parties (DPR and MK) authorized to review the Perppu. The first and the second forms of the phenomena and legal procedures can be regarded as a kind of passive authority. While the third form of the phenomena and legal procedures can be regarded as a type of active authority.

Download Full-text

Peran Teori Keadulatan Tuhan pada Perang Kediri dan Tumapel pada Pembentukan Hukum di Indonesia

Kosmik Hukum ◽

10.30595/kosmikhukum.v20i2.7477 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 20 (2) ◽

pp. 128

Author(s):

Sarip Sarip

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

The State ◽

Modern Times ◽

Old Order ◽

State Administration ◽

History Of ◽

The Republic

The sovereignty of God in the state administration of the Kingdom of Indonesia can be seen from the words of Ken Arok attacking the kingdom of Kediri, "O Pastors who adhere to Shiva and Buddhism. Please bless me to have the title Bhatara Guru ”. The study of God's sovereignty can be clearly seen from the history of Ken Arok, who was the king of Tumapel, who succeeded in using God's sovereignty to gain power over Kediri. So the question is the extent to which the existence of the struggle for God's sovereignty in Indonesia which underlies divine values. Ken Arok as the ruler of Tumapel who is a subordinate of Kediri has committed an offense of royal state order. What was done by Ken Arok in terms of International Law as "belligerent". Ken Arok's movement to gain power by committing offenses on the state administration of the kingdom, legalized by the laws of the royal state at that time, as well as international law today. In addition to evidence of the theory of God's sovereignty which was applied by Ken Arok to strengthen his power, in modern times too, the theory of God's sovereignty was practiced by Soekarno during the Old Order. As proof of the theory of God's Sovereignty during the Soekarno era came from the minister of religion of the Republic of Indonesia who at that time was held by Wahid Hasyim, who considered it important to build a magnificent mosque as gratitude for Indonesia's independence in the struggle against the invaders.Keywords: sovereignty, God, struggle, kingdom

Download Full-text

CONFIDENTIALITY GUARANTEE OF TAX INFORMATION AGAINST THE PROPERTY OF TAXPAYER IN MANAGEMENT EXAMINATION AND THE STATE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES WHICH CONDUCTED BY THE AUDIT BOARD

Unram Law Review ◽

10.29303/ulrev.v1i1.8 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

pp. 133-148

Author(s):

Johannes Johny Koynja

Keyword(s):

Rule Of Law ◽

Legal System ◽

Judicial Review ◽

The State ◽

Court Decision ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Legal Principles ◽

The Third ◽

The Republic ◽

Research Analysis

This research analysis meant to find out legal consideration used byConstitution judge, whether in accordance or not to legal principles, moral andsocial justice. Therefore,this article tend to place problems that linked to conflict of norm in term of The Audit Board (BPK) authorities over a good and compliance Taxpayerl,and progressive related The Constitutional Court decision of The Audit Board(BPK) authorities of a good and compliance taxpayer in the context of The 1945Constitution of The Republic of Indonesia at its proportion in order tostraightening the consistency of rule of law in Indonesia’s legal system, for theshake of completion of logical degree of optimal norm.Intrinsically, decision in the case of petition for Judicial Review of the Act Number 28 of 2007 on the Third Amendment to the Act Number 6 of 1983 on the General Taxation Provisions and Procedures against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, can be made guidance (stelling) to the happening ofopaqueness norm or obscurity norm (vague van normen) which flange at thehappening conflict of norm (geschiljd van normen) related existence of twoimportance of law between The Audit Board (BPK) and Taxpayers which both ofthe same owning of rights which under the aegis of Constitution.

Download Full-text

RELASI LEMBAGA NEGARA DALAM PERSPEKTIF UNDANG UNDANG DASAR NEGARA REPUBLIK INDONESIA 1945

UNIFIKASI Jurnal Ilmu Hukum ◽

10.25134/unifikasi.v4i2.693 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

pp. 55

Author(s):

Abustan, Abustan

Keyword(s):

Law Enforcement ◽

State Institution ◽

The State ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Basic Principles ◽

State Institutions ◽

Know How ◽

History Of ◽

The Republic ◽

Or History

AbstractThe basic principles of the state in order to be operational must be spelled out in relation to the pattern of power between state institutions, Implementation of the explanation of relations is done through the constitution, the attitude for need of Indonesian citizens to understand in full and complete about the various relationships between state institutions in the perspective of the UUD NRI 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. The purpose of this study is to know how the background or history of the Constitution. to know and analyze how the relation of state institutions today, and how the practice of institutional arrangements in the current era of reform., after being conducted four times the amendment of the Constitution. This research method used normative juridical. The result of this research is the natural implementation of law enforcement power, for example, even though it is determined that the power to make law is owned by DPR, but in its implementation requires cooperation with the co legislator, that is the President and the DPD (for the design of certain laws), a provision of law which has obtained the approval of the DPR and the President and has been ratified and make the law can say no legal force binding the Constitutional Court (MK), if declared contradictory to the� Constitution.� This shows a very serious problem with regard to the relation of state institutions after the amendment (post-reform). so the conclusion is that if the arrangement of relation of state institution fails to do, it will result in the weakening of the state system which is based on the principles of democracy, state law and constitutionalism. The function of each power must adhere to the principle of trias politics.Keywords: Relation, regulation, institution.�AbstrakPrinsip-prinsip dasar yang ada di negara agar menjadi operasional, harus harus dijabarkan ke dalam relasi pola kekuasaan antara lembaga negara. Implementasi penjabaran relasi itu di lakukan melalui konstitusi. Bahkan, perlunya sikap warga negara Indonesia (WNI) memahami secara utuh dan lengkap mengenai berbagai relasi antar lembaga negara dalam perspektif UUD NRI 1945. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui bagaimana latar belakang atau sejarah perubahan UUD NRI 1945, untuk mengetahui dan menganalisis bagaimana relasi lembaga negara saat ini, setelah dilakukan empat kali perubahan UUD NRI 1945 serta untuk mengetahui dan� menganalisis bagaimana praktek penataan kelembagaan di era� roformasi sekarang ini. Metode penelitian ini mneggunakan yuridis normative dengan alat pengumpul data melalui studi kepustakaan dan untuk menganalisnya menggunakan deskriptif analisis. Hasil penelitian ini adalah alam pelaksanaan kekuasaan pembuatan undang-undang misalnya, walaupun ditentukan kekuasaan membuat undang-undang duni�liki oleh DPR, namun dalam pelaksanaannya membutuhkan kerja sama dengan colegislator, yaitu Presiden dan DPD (untuk rancangan un�dang-undang tertentu), bahkan suatu ketentuan undang-undang yang telah mendapatkan persetujuan bersama DPR dan Presiden serta te�lah disahkan dan diundangkan pun dapat dinyatakan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat oleh Mahkamah Konsitusi (MK) jika dinyatakan bertentangan de�ngan UUD 1945. Hal ini menunjukkan persoalan yang sangat serius berkenaan dengan relasi lembaga negara setelah amandemen (pasca reformasi). Kesimpulan yaitu jika penataan relasi lembaga negara gagal dilakukan, maka akan berakibat pada makin melemahnya sistem ketatanegaraan yang di dasarkan pada prinsip-prinsip demokrasi, negara hukum, dan konstitusionalisme. Fungsi kekuasaan masing-masing harus berpegang pada prinsip trias politika.Kata kunci : Relasi, penataan, kelembagaan.

Download Full-text

THE AUTHORITY OF PEOPLE’S CONSULTATIVE ASSEMBLY BY SUBSQUENT OF THE AMENDMENT OF THE 1945 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA

Yustisia Jurnal Hukum ◽

10.20961/yustisia.v6i3.17070 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 6 (3) ◽

pp. 681

Author(s):

Sanidjar Pebrihariati R

Keyword(s):

Research Method ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Problem Formulation ◽

The State ◽

Popular Sovereignty ◽

Constitutional Democracy ◽

State Institutions ◽

The People ◽

State Administration ◽

The Republic

People’s Consultative Assemly (hereinafter reffered to MPR) membership consisting of members of the House of Representative (hereinafter reffered to DPR) and Regional Representative Council (hereinafter reffered to DPD) members indicates that the MPR is still viewed as a representative body of the people because of its membership elected in the general election. The change of position of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR), then the understanding of the form of popular sovereignty is reflected in three branches of power, namely the representative institution, the President, and the holder of the judicial power. Problem formulation discussed are: 1) How is the position of the People's Consultative Assembly as the implementer of people's sovereignty in Indonesia before the amendment of the 1945 Constitution? 2) How the position of MPR members coming from the DPD after the Amendment of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. The research method used in this research is Normative Law research method, which uses secondary data. The discussion in this research: 1) the MPR as the executor of the sovereignty of the People in Indonesia, prior to the 1945 amendment, we see in the provisions On Article 1 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution stipulates that: "Sovereignty is in the hands of the people, and carried out according to the law basic". In the above article it contains three meanings, namely: a). The sovereignty of the people is implemented by all state institutions established in the Constitution, b). The sovereignty of the people must be subject to the constitution, c) constitutional supremacy. People's sovereignty is limited by the rules of the Constitution and constitutional democracy. 2) Position of MPR members originating from DPD after the Amendment of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. After the fourth amendment of the 1945 Constitution, (hereinafter referred to as the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia), there is a fairly fundamental change in both the state administration system and the state institutions in Indonesia .

Download Full-text