scholarly journals The Indonesian Constitutional Court and the Democratic Institutions in Judicial Review

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 189
Author(s):  
Andy Omara
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Strong Form ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Democratic Institutions ◽  
Right To Work ◽  
Conditional Decision ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Implementing Agencies

This paper focuses on the relationship between the Indonesian Constitutional Court, the legislature, and the executive in judicial review. It aims to explain the Court strategies in deciding judicial review cases related to the right to work in relation with the executive and the legislature. It appears that while constitutionally the Court is granted with a strong form of judicial review (as reflected in the finality of its decisions), it also employed other approaches in deciding cases related to the right to work. These approaches include the declaration of incompatibility, conditional decision, and the invalidation of a statute in its entirety. This paper argues that Katharine G. Young’s typology of judicial review is quite helpful as an interpretive tool to understand the Court approaches when it decided cases related the right to work. The use of various approaches by the Court affected the relationship between the Court, the executive, and the legislature. This is because the executive and the legislature are the implementing agencies of the Court rulings.

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.

Law and Religion in Indonesia: The Constitutional Court and the Blasphemy Law

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 1-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa A. Crouch
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractA growing number of religious minorities have been prosecuted for the criminal offence of ‘insulting a religion’, specifically Islam, in Indonesia. Both local and international human rights organisations have condemned the perceived misuse of what is widely referred to in Indonesia as the ‘Blasphemy Law’. This article will analyse the application for judicial review of the Blasphemy Law, which was submitted to the Indonesian Constitutional Court in 2009. It will critique the various submissions made to the court and analyse the historic decision of the judiciary, which upheld the validity of the Blasphemy Law. In doing this, it will explore how the relationship between law and religion, particularly Islam, has been debated, negotiated and articulated in democratic Indonesia

scholarly journals Menyoal Kebebasan Beragama dan Penodaan Agama Di Indonesia

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-212
Author(s):  
Yayan Sopyan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Religious Beliefs ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Reform Era ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

Abstract: Questioning the Religious Freedom and blasphemy in Indonesia. The presence of the Constitutional Court in the reform era is the strengthening of the foundations of constitutionalism in the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945. The Court in this case a role to enforce and the protector of the citizen's constitutional rights and the protector of the human rights. Including in this case, the right to religion and religious practices and teachings of their respective religions, in accordance with the constitutional mandate. However, on the other hand there is the discourse of freedom of expression and freedom of speech includes freedom to broadcast religious beliefs and understanding of the "deviant" and against the "mainstream" religious beliefs and understanding in general, as in the case of Ahmadiyah. The Court in this case is required to provide the best attitude when faced judicial review in this case still required in addition to guarding the constitution in order to run properly.   Abstrak: Menyoal Kebebasan Beragama dan Penodaan Agama di Indonesia. Kehadiran lembaga Mahkamah Konstitusi di era reformasi merupakan upaya penguatan terhadap dasar-dasar konstitusionalisme pada Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. MK dalam hal ini berperan menegakkan dan melindungi hak-hak konstitusional warga negara (the protector of the citizen’s constitutional rights) dan pelindung HAM (the protector of the human rights). Termasuk dalam hal ini, hak untuk memeluk agama dan menjalankan ibadah serta ajaran agamanya masing-masing, sesuai dengan amanat konstitusi. Namun, disisi lain ada wacana kebebasan berekspresi dan kebebasan berpendapat termasuk didalamnya kebebasan untuk menyiarkan keyakinan dan pemahaman keagamaan yang “menyimpang” dan bertentangan dengan “mainstream” keyakinan dan pemahaman keagamaan pada umumnya, seperti dalam kasus Ahmadiyah. MK dalam hal ini dituntut untuk mampu memberikan sikap terbaik saat dihadapkan judicial review dalam kasus ini selain tetap dituntut untuk mengawal konstitusi agar dapat berjalan sebagaimana mestinya. DOI: 10.15408/jch.v2i2.2314

scholarly journals Penegakan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 13/PUU-XV/2017 Mengenai Hak Mendapatkan Pekerjaan dan Hak Membentuk Keluarga

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 858
Author(s):  
Muhammad Reza Winata ◽  
Intan Permata Putri
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Legal Power ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

Jaminan konstitusi terkait hak konstitusional untuk mendapatkan pekerjaan dalam Pasal 28D ayat (2) UUD NRI 1945 dan hak konstitusional untuk membentuk keluarga dalam Pasal 28B ayat (1) UUD 1945 telah dibatasi dengan adanya ketentuan Pasal 153 ayat (1) huruf f Undang-Undang No 13 Tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan. Keberadaan perjanjian kerja menghalangi hak pekerja untuk menikah dalam satu institusi karena pekerja harus mengalami pemutusan hubungan kerja untuk dapat melaksanakan haknya membentuk keluarga yang sebenarnya dijamin dalam konstitusi dan peraturan perundang- undangan. Pengujian Pasal 153 ayat (1) huruf f UU No 13 Tahun 2003 dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 13/PUU-XV/2017 telah menyatakan frasa "kecuali telah diatur dalam perjanjian kerja, peraturan Perusahaan, atau perjanjian kerja bersama" bertentangan dengan UUD 1945. Artikel ini hendak menjawab kekuatan mengikat dan akibat hukum putusan, sekaligus Penegakan putusan dengan memetakan penyelesaian terkait peraturan perundang-undangan dan perjanjian kerja yang tidak tidak sesuai dengan putusan dan bertentangan dengan prinsip kebebasan berkontrak. Penelitian ini didasarkan pada penelitian kualitatif, dimana sumber analisis yakni Putusan MK terkait permasalahan yang diangkat, peraturan perundang-undangan, buku dan artikel ilmiah. Artikel ini hendak memetakan penyelesaian yang sesuai terkait kepada perjanjian kerja yang tidak menjamin hak pekerja yang dijamin dalam konstitusi, serta bertentangan dengan prinsip kebebasan berkontrak. yakni: pertama, penyelarasan peraturan perundang undangan di bawah Undang-undang judicial review di Mahkamah Agung, kedua, penyelesaian perselisihan hak melalui Pengadilan Hubungan Industrian yang akan menguji penegakan putusan dalam perjanjian kerja, peraturan perusahaan, atau perjanjian kerja bersama.The constitutional guarantee regarding constitutional rights to obtain employment in Article 28 D paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and the constitutional rights to form a family in Article 28 B paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution has been limited by the provisions of Article 153 paragraph (1) letter f Law No. 13 of 2003 concerning Labor. The existence of a work agreement prevents the right of workers to get married in one institution because workers must experience termination of employment to be able to exercise their rights to form a family which is actually guaranteed in the constitution and legislation. Testing Article 153 paragraph (1) letter f of Law No. 13 of 2003 in the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 13/PUU-XV/2017 has stated the phrase "except as stipulated in work agreements, company regulations, or collective labor agreements" contrary to the 1945 Constitution. This article is about to answer the binding and consequent legal power of the decision, as well as Enforcement of decisions by mapping out solutions related to legislation and work agreements that are not incompatible with decisions and are contrary to the principle of freedom of contract. This research is based on qualitative research, where the source of analysis is the Constitutional Court Decision related to the issues raised, legislation, scientific books, and articles. This article intends to map appropriate solutions related to work agreements that do not guarantee workers’ rights guaranteed in the constitution, as well as contrary to the principle of freedom of contract. namely: first, alignment of legislation under the judicial review law in the Supreme Court, secondly, settlement of rights disputes through the Industrial Relations Court which will test enforcement of decisions in work agreements, company regulations, or collective labor agreements.

scholarly journals Konsistensi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Pengujian Beberapa Undang-Undang Terkait Kesehatan

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 763
Author(s):  
Ade Irawan Taufik
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Private Matter ◽  
The Right ◽  
Material Tests

 Timbulnya pengakuan kesehatan sebagai hak asasi menunjukan perubahan paradigma yang luar biasa, karena kesehatan tidak lagi dipandang hanya sebagai urusan pribadi namun sebagai bentuk tanggung jawab negara dan hak hukum (legal rights). Tujuan diberlakukannya berbagai undang-undang terkait kesehatan adalah untuk memberikan jaminan konstitusionalitas hak atas kesehatan, namun dengan diberlakukannya berbagai undang-undang tersebut tidak berarti terjaminnya hak konstitusional atas kesehatan, hal ini tergambar dengan banyaknya uji materi terhadap berbagai undang-undang tersebut. Banyaknya permohonan uji materi tersebut menarik untuk diteliti terhadap prinsip-prinsip atau asas-asas yang melandasi materi muatan berbagai undang-undang terkait kesehatan dan konsistensi antar putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) dan konsistensi Putusan MK dengan prinsip atau asas yang melandasi materi muatan undang-undang terkait kesehatan. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif disimpulkan bahwa prinsip-prinsip atau asas mempunyai arti penting sebagai landasan materi undang-undang sehingga dapat dijadikan sebagai batu uji dalam melakukan pengujian undang-undang. Kesimpulan lainnya yakni terdapat inkonsistensi antar putusan MK dan inkonsistensi putusan MK dengan prinsip atas asas yang melandasi materi muatan berbagai undang-undang terkait kesehatan.The emergence of the recognition of health as a human right shows an extraordinary paradigm shift, because health is no longer seen only as a private matter but as a form of state responsibility and legal rights. The purpose of the enactment of various laws related to health is to provide a constitutional guarantee of the right to health, however, the enactment of these various laws does not mean the guarantee of constitutional rights to health, this is showed by the number of judicial review of various laws. The number of requests for material tests is interesting to be examined on the principles that underlie the contents of various health related to laws and consistency between decisions of the Constitutional Court (MK) and consistency of decisions of the Constitutional Court to the principles that underlie the content of laws related to health. By using the normative juridical research method, it can be concluded that principles have an important meaning as a basis for the material of the law so that they can be used as a touchstone in conducting the testing of laws. Another conclusion is that there are inconsistencies between the Constitutional Court's decisions and the inconsistency of the Constitutional Court's decision to the principle on the basis of the material content of various laws related to health.

scholarly journals URGENSI PEMBENTUKAN UNDANG-UNDANG HAK ANGKET DPR RI (THE URGENCY OF MAKING THE LAW ON THE RIGHT OF INQUIRY OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA)

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-194
Author(s):  
Novianto Murthi Hantoro
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Current Regulation ◽  
Presidential System ◽  
Subject And Object ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

Prior to the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK), the implementation of the right to inquiry was regulated in two laws, namely Law No. 6 of 1954 on the Establishment of the Rights of Inquiry of the House of Representatives (DPR) and Law No. 27 of 2009 on MPR, DPR, DPD, and DPRD. Through proposal for judicial review, MK decided the Law on the Rights of Inquiry was null and void because it was not in accordance with the presidential system adopted in the 1945 Constitution. Today, the exercise of the right of inquiry is only based on Law on MPR, DPR, DPD, and DPRD. Nonetheless, the Amendment of Law No. 27 of 2009 into Law No. 17 of 2014 could not accommodate some substances of the null and void Law on the Rights of Inquiry. The urgency of the formulation of the law on the right to inquiry, other than to carry out the Constitutional Court’s decision; are to close the justice gap of the current regulation; to avoid multi-interpretation of the norm, for example on the subject and object of the right of inquiry; and to execute the mandate of Article 20A paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution. The regulation on the right to inquiry shall be formulated separately from the Law on MPR, DPR, DPD and DPRD, with at least several substances to be discussed, namely: definition, mechanisms, and procedure, as well as examination of witnesses, expert, and documents. AbstrakSebelum adanya putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK), pelaksanaan hak angket diatur dalam dua undang-undang, yaitu Undang-Undang Nomor 6 Tahun 1954 tentang Penetapan Hak Angket DPR (UU Angket) dan Undang-Undang Nomor 27 Tahun 2009 tentang Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah, dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah (UU MPR, DPR, DPD, dan DPRD). Melalui permohonan pengujian undang-undang, MK membatalkan keberlakuan UU Angket karena sudah tidak sesuai dengan sistem presidensial yang dianut dalam UUD 1945. Pelaksanaan hak angket saat ini hanya berdasarkan UU MPR, DPR, DPD, dan DPRD. Penggantian UU No. 27 Tahun 2009 menjadi UU No. 17 Tahun 2014 tentang MPR, DPR, DPD, dan DPRD ternyata tidak mengakomodasi beberapa substansi UU Angket yang telah dibatalkan. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, terdapat urgensi untuk membentuk Undang-Undang tentang Hak Angket DPR RI. Urgensi tersebut, selain sebagai tindak lanjut putusan MK, juga untuk menutup celah kekosongan hukum pada pengaturan saat ini dan untuk menghindari multi-interpretasi norma, misalnya terhadap subjek dan objek hak angket. Pengaturan mengenai hak angket perlu diatur di dalam undang-undang yang terpisah dari UU MPR, DPR, DPD, dan DPRD, dengan materi muatan yang berisi tentang pengertian-pengertian, mekanisme, dan hukum acara. Pembentukan Undang-Undang tentang Hak Angket diperlukan guna memenuhi amanat Pasal 20A ayat (4) UUD 1945.

scholarly journals LIMITATION OF THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH ON THE INDONESIAN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT CONSIDERATION

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-36
Author(s):  
Titis Anindyajati
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Public Order ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Social Media Platforms ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right

Nowadays, everyone tends to use the right to freedom of speech without limitation, such as emergences of hate speech expression on various social media platforms. However, such expression is regulated by Article 28, paragraph (2) of the ITE Law and deemed to be contrary to public order. On the other hand, this law was considered by some people as a criminalization towards the right to freedom of speech. This paradox becomes a big issue that never ceases to be discussed. That is why Constitutional Court had conducted judicial review on some norms related to freedom of speech. This study aims to analyze the Constitutional Court decision towards the polarity of the right to freedom of speech and the public order. This study uses normative research with the statutory, analytical and comparative approach. Therefore, the results show the importance of limitation in implementing the freedom of speech to protect the constitutional right of society as stated in the 1945 Constitution. Despite the already decided judicial review by the Court, there is still an urgency to revise The ITE law in order to clarify certain rules related to hate speech in social media.

scholarly journals Whose Autonomy is it Anyway? Freedom of Contract, the Right to Work and the General Principles of EU Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 285-317
Author(s):  
Niall O’Connor
Keyword(s):  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Legal Studies ◽  
Right To Work ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Just how significant is the freedom of contract found in Article 16 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights for the regulation of the employment relationship? For the first half of its existence, few could have foreseen that Article 16 would soon be at the centre of debates surrounding the place of business freedoms within EU employment law. This has changed in the wake of a number of controversial decisions in which the Court of Justice of the EU relied on Article 16 to undermine the effectiveness of employee-protective legislation. The article begins by setting out the nature of freedom of contract in EU law and its effects in the employment context. This is followed by a consideration of the relationship between the general principles and the Charter. Critical Legal Studies is relied on to show that existing arguments as to the use of Article 16 as a radical tool in the employment context have been both exaggerated and underplayed. Finally, potential counterweights to freedom of contract are examined, notably the right to work as both a general principle and Charter right.

EU Countries and the UK

2021 ◽  
pp. 295-306
Author(s):  
Mads Andenas
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Court System ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter compares European Union countries to the United Kingdom. It aims at ascertaining not so much whether a common core exists but how it is shaped and evolves, also in response to influences by supranational legal orders. EU countries do not adhere to one model. Administrative law is subject to rapid development, and even countries that share many structures and general features do not develop at the same speed or in the same direction. In the UK, there is no specialized administrative court jurisdiction. There is one general court system that deals with civil, criminal, and administrative cases; but there are many administrative tribunals and appeals tribunals. Nearly all the EU countries have a specialised administrative court system, and the majority has a constitutional court. The chapter considers the perceived divide between civil law countries and the common law in the UK, in the light of the relationship between national law and EU and European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) law. It also looks at the four main features of the legal systems selected for comparison: the constitutional relevance of judicial review; the limitations of judicial review; procedural errors or omissions; and annulment and damages.

Local Governments and Political Question Doctrine in Hungary

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 809-819
Author(s):  
Janos Fazekas
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Political Question

The main aim of this paper is to investigate a quite unexamined area: the relationship between political question doctrine and local governments in Hungary. The research focuses on the decisions of Hungarian courts and the Constitutional Court made on this matter. The paper takes under investigation some local governmental acts which have not been reviewed by any court. The main purpose of the research is to find out whether it is possible to take local governmental acts under efficient judicial review in Hungary?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document