scholarly journals Laws of Ratification of an International Treaty in Indonesian Laws Hierarchy

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.

scholarly journals Judicial Preview on the Bill on International Treaty Ratification

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.

scholarly journals LIETUVOS VALSTYBĖS VADOVO INSTITUTAS 1990–1992 m.

Teisė ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 92 ◽  
pp. 148-155
Author(s):  
Vytautas Sinkevičius
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Independent State ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Head Of State ◽  
Supreme Council ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic

Seime įregistruotas įstatymo „Dėl Lietuvos Respublikos Aukščiausiosios Tarybos – Atkuriamojo Seimo Pirmininko teisinio statuso“ projektas1, kuriame konstatuojama, kad 1990–1992 m. dirbusios Aukščiausiosios Tarybos – Atkuriamojo Seimo Pirmininkas yra valstybės vadovas. Seimo nariai projektą vertina nevienodai: vieni teigia, kad toks įstatymas yra būtinas, kiti tvirtina, kad jis prieštarauja Konstitucijai ir Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucinio Teismo (toliau Konstitucinio Teismo) 2002 m. birželio 19 d. nutarimui. Aukščiausiosios Tarybos – Atkuriamojo Seimo Pirmininko teisinis statusas mokslinėje literatūroje mažai nagrinėtas2. Aukščiausiosios Tarybos – Atkuriamojo Seimo Pirmininko teisinio statuso analizė ir jo įprasminimas įstatymu yra būtinas, siekiant užtikrinti teisinį aiškumą ir tikrumą bei įtvirtinti atkurtos nepriklausomos Lietuvos valstybės vadovo institucijos istorinį ir teisinį tęstinumą nuo to laiko, kai po Lietuvos nepriklausomybės atkūrimo 1918 m. vasario 16 d. buvo išrinktas pirmasis Lietuvos Respublikos Prezidentas.  A draft Law “On the Legal Status of the Chairman of the Supreme Council-Reconstituent Seimas” has been registered at the Seimas, in which it is stated that the Chairman of the 1990–1992 Supreme Council-Reconstituent Seimas was the Head of State. The members of the Seimas are somewhat ambivalent about the draft law: some of them assert that such a law is necessary, whereas some others maintain that this law is in conflict with the Constitution and the Constitutional Court’s ruling of 19 June 2002. According to the Provisional Basic Law (Provisional Constitution), the Chairman of the 1990–1992 Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania was the highest official of the Republic of Lithuania with the powers to represent the Republic of Lithuania in international relations, to sign laws of the Republic of Lithuania and other acts passed by the Supreme Council, hold talks and sign international treaties of Lithuania, and submit them for ratification to the Supreme Council. He also had the powers to recommend candidates for the appointment or election to the posts of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Lithuania, the President of the Supreme Court of Lithuania, chairmen of divisions of this court, the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Lithuania, etc. The Provisional Basic Law (Provisional Constitution) does not contain the words “the Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania shall be Head of State”, however, it does not mean that the independent State of Lithuania restored on 11 March 1990, purportedly, did not have any institution of its Head of State, and that the Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania, purportedly, was not Head of State. The fact that the Chairman of the Supreme Council was Head of State is confirmed by the provision “[t]he Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania shall be the highest official of the Republic of Lithuania” of the Provisional Basic Law and by the powers provided for the Chairman of the Supreme Council. The compliance of the provisions of the draft Law “On the Legal Status of the Chairman of the Supreme Council-Reconstituent Seimas” with the Constitution of 1992 that is valid at present cannot be questioned on the grounds that, purportedly, this draft law is not in line with both the Provisional Basic Law of 1990 and such a concept of its provisions that were presented by the Constitutional Court in its ruling of 19 June 2002. This draft law should only be viewed through the prism of the Constitution of 1992 that is valid at present.

scholarly journals Hukum Internasional sebagai Alat Interpretasi dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang

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.

scholarly journals The Position of Constitutional Complaint in the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-78
Author(s):  
Agsel Awanisa ◽  
Yusdianto Yusdianto ◽  
Siti Khoiriah
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Case Number

The purpose of this research is to determine the constitutional complaint mechanism based on comparisons in other countries, practices, and adaptation of constitutional complaints under the authority of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Many cases with constitutional complaint substance have been submitted to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia even though they don’t have this authority. This research uses a normative legal research method using a statutory approach, a conceptual approach, a comparative approach, and a case approach. This research indicates that the constitutional complaint mechanism in Germany, South Korea, and South Africa has been well implemented. In practice, cases with constitutional complaint substance are filed to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia by changing the form by using the legal means of a judicial review, such as case number 16/PUU-VI/ 2008, case number 140/PUU-XIII/2015 and case number 102/PUU-VII/2009. Due to the consideration of the structure, substance, and culture of law, adaptation of constitutional complaint within the authority of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia needs to be carried out by amending Law Number 24 of 2003 jo. Law Number 7 of 2020 concerning the Constitutional Court.

scholarly journals Constitutional and legal status of the Constitutional Council of France

2020 ◽  
pp. 138-141
Author(s):  
Andrey Irkliienko
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Dual Nature ◽  
National Assembly ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Made In

he Constitutional Council of France is a body of constitutional control established by the Constitution of 1958. The ConstitutionalCouncil is not the only body that carries out the control over constitutionality. The peculiarity of constitutional control in France consistsin the fact that it has a dual nature and goes beyond well-known models of constitutional control. The constitutionality of acts, issuedby the Parliament, is considered by the Constitutional Council, and after the executive bodies do that, it is passed on to the State Council.Despite the fact that the Constitutional Council is not nominated by a court, its decisions, by their essence, are judicial acts and,likewise the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, are endowed with the property of binding force. They are obligatory forall administrative and judicial bodies and are not subjected to revision (the Paragraph 3 of the Article 62 of the French Constitution).However, it should be taken into account that in addition to binding decisions, the Constitutional Council “expresses opinions” that areadvisory in their nature.In addition to carrying out constitutional control, the Constitutional Council has a number of other functions, such as political,advisory and acts as a court to assess the results of elections of deputies to the National Assembly and the Senate, and elections of thePresident of the Republic. Perhaps that is why the Constitutional Council classifies its decisions due to the types of its own powers.Herewith, the noted specific peculiarities are denoted by the Constitutional Council with the help of fixed letter combinations, which are included in the numbers of decision: REF, enacted on referendum issues; ORGA, enacted on issues of the organization of the Cons -titutional Council, etc.Since, despite all the diversity of functions of the Constitutional Council of France, therefore, its main purpose remains the cons -titutional control. Therefore, using the criterion of powers, under which decisions are made, in terms of initial graduation one shouldpoint out the decisions on issues, which are connected with providing compliance of the Constitution with regulatory acts (assuring thepriority of the Constitution), and decisions passed while carrying out other powers.Decisions of the Constitutional Council outstand with being formal and brief. A decision can take literally a few paragraphs. Themost frequently, the Constitutional Council merely refers to a constitutional norm or is limited to the phrase “these provisions do notcontradict the Constitution”, giving guidance and justifying its position in the least.

scholarly journals ANALISIS FRAMING PEMBERITAAN SENGKETA PILPRES TAHUN 2019 PADA SURAT KABAR JAWA POS

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-41
Author(s):  
Muhammad Lukman Ihsanuddin
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Strong Basis ◽  
Candidate Pair ◽  
The Media ◽  
Election Results ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Almost All

This research was conducted in order to find out the objectivity of the media in delivering news of the 2019 presidential election dispute in the Republic of Indonesia. The research method used is qualitative using Robert N. Entman's framing approach. Sources of data in this study are primary data, data obtained from the Java post coverage from the 18 June to 28 June 2019 edition, and secondary data in the form of writing about Java post and books relating to Robert N. Entman's framing analysis. The results of his research are 1) The reporting written by journalists uses two depictions of moral values, namely positive values and negative values. Positive values are often raised to describe the actions of the Constitutional Court, KPU and candidate pair 01 JokowiMa'ruf Amin, while negative values are often raised against the depictions of the candidate pair 02 Prabowo-Sandi. Almost all news texts written by journalists describe the weak position of candidate pair 02 due to the weakness of the arguments submitted and the evidence and witnesses provided cannot be accounted for, even it is reported that candidate pair 02 has also submitted witnesses who provided false statements. The second aspect is regarding the position of Jawa Pos in reporting disputes over the results of the 2019 presidential election. Journalists in Jawa Pos felt less balanced in reporting the conflict. This can be seen from the emphasis which is indirectly more favorable for the position of candidate pair Jokowi-Ma'ruf Amin compared with candidate pair 02 Prabowo-Sandi. Almost all news taken as objects of study in this study tend to prioritize Jokowi-Ma'ruf Amin and marginalize Prabowo-Sandi's position.Candidate 01Jokowi-Ma'ruf Amin is depicted as a disadvantaged party by submitting the dispute of the 2019 presidential election results to the constitutional line while pair 02 of Prabowo-Sandi is described as a guilty party and does not have a strong basis to prove his allegations regarding fraud committed by the paslon 01 Jokowi-Ma'ruf Amin. 2) the reporting of postal Javanese journalists in reporting the 2019 Presidential Election Dispute conflict, lacking balance in presenting information, tended to support the candidate pair 1 Jokowi-Ma'ruf Amin. Keywords: Framing, 2019 Presidential Election Dispute, Newspaper, Jawa Pos Penelitian ini dilakukan dalama rangka ingin mengetahui objektifitas media dalam menyampaikan berita sengketa pilpres tahun 2019 di Republik Indonesia. Dalam penelitian ini mengungakan metode kualitatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan framing Robert. N. Entman. Sumber data dalam penelitian ini adalah data primer, data yang didapatkan dari pemberitaan Jawa pos dari edisi 18 Juni sampai 28 Juni 2019,dan data sekunder berupatulisan mengenai Jawa pos serta buku-buku yang berkaitan dengan analisisframing Robert. N. Entman. Hasil penelitiannya yaitu 1) Pemberitaan yang ditulis wartawan menggunakan dua penggambaran nilai moral, yaitu nilai positif dan nilai negatif. Nilai positif sering dimunculkan terhadap penggambaran tindakan MK, KPU dan paslon 01 Jokowi-Ma’ruf Amin, sedangkan nilai negatif sering dimunculkan terhadap penggambaran tindakan paslon 02 Prabowo-Sandi. Hampir seluruh teks berita yang wartawan tulis mengambarkan lemahnya posisi paslon 02 karena tidak kuatnya dalil-dalil yang diajukan serta bukti-bukti dan saksi yang diberikan tidak dapat dipertanggungjawabkan, bahkan diberitakan bahwa paslon 02 juga telah mengajukan saksi yang memberikan keterangan palsu. Aspek kedua adalah mengenai posisi Jawa Pos dalam memberitakan sengketa hasil pilpres 2019.Wartawan Jawa Pos dirasa kurang berimbang dalam memberitakan konflik tersebut. Hal ini dapat dilihat dari penekanan yang secara tidak langsung lebih menguntungkan posisi paslon 01 Jokowi-Ma’ruf Amin dibanding dengan paslon 02 Prabowo-Sandi. Hampir seluruh berita yang diambil sebagai objek kajian dalam penelitian ini cenderung mengutamakan pihak Jokowi-Ma’ruf Amin dan memarjinalkan posisi Prabowo-Sandi. Paslon 01 Jokowi-Ma’ruf Amin digambarkan sebagai pihak yang dirugikan dengan adanya pengajuan sengketa hasil pilpres 2019 ke jalur konstitusi sedangkan paslon 02 Prabowo-Sandi digambarkan sebagai pihak yang bersalah dan tidak memiliki dasar yang kuat untuk membuktikan tuduhannya mengenai kecurangan yang telah dilakukan oleh paslon 01 Jokowi-Ma’ruf Amin. 2) pemberitaan wartawan Jawa pos dalam memberitakan konflik Sengketa Pilpres Tahun 2019, kurang berimbang dalam menyuguhkan informasi, cenderung mendukung pada paslon 1 Jokowi-Ma’ruf Amin. Kata Kunci: Framing, Sengketa Pilpres 2019, Surat Kabar, Jawa Pos

scholarly journals KEWENANGAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI REPUBLIK INDONESIA DALAM PEMBENTUKAN NORMA BARU (SUATU KAJIAN TERHADAP PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 21/PUU-XII/2014 JO PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 46/PUU-XIV/2016)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 474
Author(s):  
Elisabet . ◽  
Cut Memi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Legal Norm ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

One of the authorities of the Constitutional Court governed by the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945 was the examining of laws against the contitution or judicial review. Inside the regulations which governing the implementation of this authority, the Constitutional Court only acts as a negative legislator, namely canceling or reinforcing a norm tested by the Petitioner. But in practice, the Constitutional Court has changed its role to become a positive legislator, who is forming a new legal norm, which is the authority of legislators. The Constitutional Court should not be able to form a new legal norm because there is no legal basis which regulate that. But Constitutional Court can form a new legal norm in some urgent circumstances, relating to Human Rights, and preventing legal vacuum. In addition, the establishment of laws by lawmakers that require a long process and time. This is compelling Constitutional Court to make substitute norm before the law was established by the legislators. In the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 46/PUU-XVI/2016, the Court actually wants to establish a new legal norm, but because the articles in the petitioned have criminal sanctions, and if the Constitutional Court approves the petition, the Constitutional Court has formulated a new criminal act that can only be formed by the lawmaker. Whereas in the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 21/PUU-XII/2014, the Constitutional Court established a new norm because in the article a quo there were no criminal sanctions.

scholarly journals LEMBAGA JUDICIAL REVIEW UNDANG-UNDANG TERHADAP UNDANG-UNDANG DASAR : PERBANDINGAN ANTARA KEWENANGAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI KOREA SELATAN DENGAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI REPUBLIK INDONESIA

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 368
Author(s):  
Joseph Atja Sulandra ◽  
Anak Agung Ngurah Roy Sumahardika
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Guardian

This study aimed to compare the profile and authority of the Constitutional Court of South Korea with the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, which is granted by its Constitution and related laws. The aim is to see how far the role of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia as an institution of judicial review, so that it can also note the advantages and disadvantages in its function as the guardian of the constitution. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk membandingkan profil dan kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi Korea Selatan dengan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia, yang diberikan oleh Undang-Undang Dasar serta Undang-Undang terkait. Tujuannya adalah untuk melihat seberapa jauh peran Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia sebagai Lembaga Judicial Review Undang-undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar, sehingga dapat dilihat kelebihanan dan kekurangannya masing-masing dalam fungsinya sebagai lembaga pengawal konstitusi.

Freedom of Religion and the Legal Status of Churches: A Case Study from the Serbian Constitutional Court

2020 ◽  
Vol 56 ◽  
pp. 487-507
Author(s):  
Tijana Surlan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Canon Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Freedom Of Association ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

This article offers a short study of the conjugation of freedom of religion, freedom of association and the legal status of religions and churches. Human rights are elaborated as defined in international human rights law, accentuated by the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. A compliance case that came before the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Serbia provides a national jurisprudential example useful for the analysis of relations between human rights and the legal status of a church. Analysis of the law is both horizontal and vertical: a description of norms is intertwined with a discussion of principles of identity and equality. The article explores whether the principles of human rights and freedoms and the norms regulating the legal status of a church are consistent with each other; whether these principles are independent and how their mutual relationship influences the application and interpretation of the law; and whether the norms prescribed by international law or in national jurisprudence can be applied independently of canon law, or whether application of the law has to take into account specific religious jurisdictions and relations between churches which are rooted in their autonomous canon law.

scholarly journals Upaya Menciptakan Produk Hukum Berkualitas Konstitusi Melalui Model Preventif Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 774
Author(s):  
Muhammad Reza Maulana
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
The Law ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Constitutional Issue ◽  
Legal Product

Pada hakikatnya judicial review dilaksanakan demi terciptanya keseimbangan hukum dan terpenuhinya hak konstitusional setiap pemangku kepentingan untuk bertindak dan mengajukan permohonan pembatalan suatu undang-undang kepada Mahkamah Konstitusi dengan menyatakan undang-undang tersebut telah bertentangan dengan UUD RI 1945. Pengujian undang-undang terhadap UUD 1945 dilakukan dalam upaya penyempurnaan hukum yang berlandaskan konstitusi. Setiap undang-undang haruslah dilandasi oleh aturan dasar yang tidak hanya tercantum pada konsiderannya saja, melainkan dibuat serta dilaksanakan berlandaskan nilai dan norma konstitusionalitas. judicial review yang selama ini dilakukan oleh banyak pihak pada Mahkamah Konstitusi membuktikan bahwa kualitas produk hukum atau aturan hukum yang selama ini dilahirkan oleh pembuat undang-undang seringkali bertolak belakang dengan keteraturan hukum, sehingga diperlukan langkah hukum preventive demi menjaga integritas lembaga pembentuk undang-undang agar tidak dianggap melahirkan produk hukum yang asal-asalan. Oleh karena itu, di dalam penelitian ini akan mengkaji dan menginisiasi pembentukan produk hukum yang berkualitas konstitusi sehingga Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagai lembaga pengawal konstitusi memberikan kontribusi dengan cita konstitusi dan melahirkan produk hukum dengan kualitas konstitusi. Dalam penelitian ini metode yang yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang dan konseptual. Hasil penelitian ini menggambarkan betapa pentingnya upaya preventive sebelum suatu aturan hukum kemudian ditetapkan, disahkan dan dilaksanakan, dimana ada persoalan konstitusionalitas terhadap implementasi suatu produk hukum yang kemudian oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dinyatakan bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945.Basically, judicial review has done to create a balance of law and to fulfill the constitutional right for every stakeholder to act and apply for application to constitutional court by stating the rule was contradicted to the constitution of Republic of Indonesia 1945. The application was made as an effort to perfect the law which is based on the constitution. Each rule has to be based on the basic rules, not only on its consideration but also is made and implemented in basic values and norms of contitutionality. Judicial review done by many people on constitutional court has proven that the quality of law product or rules of law made by the legislative often contradict with constitutional order of law, so it is necessary to take a step on preventive legal measurer to keep up the integrity of the rule maker of being judged making unqualified legal products. Therefore, this research reviews and initiates the production of law product so that the Constitutional Court can give preventive contribution on each legal products made, to be able to run with the ideals of the constitution and create legal products with constitution quality. This research used juridical normative method with legal and conceptual approaches. The results of this study illustrate how important preventive efforts before a rule of law are then set, ratified and implemented. In which there is a constitutional issue on the implementation of a legal product, that will be later declared by the Constitutional Court to be contradictory to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesian.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document