scholarly journals Konstitusionalitas dan Legalitas Norma dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang Terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar 1945

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 172
Author(s):  
Mohammad Mahrus Ali
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Republic

The Constitutionality of norms are inseparable with the model of judicial review of laws against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. It can be see  from the reviews of abstract and concrete norms by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The review of conrete norms in the decision of judicial review basically does not constitute authority of the Constitutional Court. Theoretically, norms review should be starting from abstract norms as the implications of the Constitutional Court authority. In order to review the constitutionality of laws, norms and abstract norms should be interpreted by the Constitutional Court. While concrete norms focuse more on the implementation or application of the norm itself. The application of norms cannot be separated from the legality of the norms, while constitutionality of norms is related to its coherence with with the Constitution. If the basis of norms review is the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia then abstract norms  should be the main subject matter to be reviewed. Otherwise, when concrete norms are the subject matters to be reviewed, then the implementation    of the norms that have been applied in concrete cases. This research is using normative juridical method with case approach in which 15 (fifteen) verdicts of the Constitutional Court of Republic of Indonesia over the period of 2003-2013 in judicial review of laws against the 1945 Constitution are analyzed. The focus is on the ratio decidendi of the Constitutional Court judges in determining the constitutionality     of norms. The result of this research shows that, the Constitutional Court, in the judicial review of laws against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia does not separate abstract norms and concrete norms dichotomously. In an attempt to protect the constitutional rights of citizens, the absence of legal remedies that can be further pursued by the  applicant,  as  well  as  to  provide  legal  certainty, the Constitutional Court, granted, in its decision,  the review of concrete norms.  Even though the Constitutional Court remains firm in satting that it is a concrete norms,  the applicant’s petition is granted in part which is concerning the review  the abstract norms only. Whereas, with respect to the verdict of the constitutional court that rejected the review of concrete norms, it is because the review is not on the constitutionality of norms but the application of the norms and also concerns     a petition for an interlocutory decision which is irrelevant to the subject matter of the case. The review of concrete norms in a rejecting ruling is a form of prudence   by the Constitutional Court in order not to prosecute the matters which constitute the authority the other judicial bodies, namely the Supreme Court and the lower courts. As for the ruling which declared a petition inadmissible, the Constitutional Court stated that the applicant has no legal standing and the Constitutional Court does not have the authority to test these norms. In the future the Constitutional Court needs to affirm the status of norms before further examining in depth the petition filed. In addition, the Constitutional Court should be conferred with the authority to hear constitutional complaint and constitutional question in order to create the harmonization of interpretation based on the Constitution.

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 Constitutional Complaint Sebagai Penambah Kewenangan Baru Dalam Undang-Undang Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nurul Komariah ◽  
Muhammad Romadhoni Nur Matori Ridwan ◽  
Alivia Vabesta ◽  
Ginanjar Damayanti ◽  
Siti Nariyah
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Secondary Sources ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right

Guarantee the rights of every citizen for violations of constitutional rights by seeking to increase the authority of the Judicial Review Request by every justice seeker for violations of constitutional rights, but not at least the petition was granted.  The Mahkarnah of the Constitution, which checks what the petition is made of, often considers that what the Judicial Review proposes is not the subject of acknowledgment.  Constitutional Court Judges considered it to be a Constitutional complaint in which this constitutional complaint was not part of the Court's authority in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and the applicable Law on the Understanding of the Constitution.  As a legislative body, the DPR is the one who has the right to change the Constitutional Court Law by including the authority of Constitutional complaint to the Constitutional Court. In this paper the author uses a research method in the form of quality data analysis with secondary sources of literature and deductive logic analysis.  Consitional Complaint to the Constitutional Court.

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 MODEL PENGUJIAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN SATU ATAP MELALUI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 247
Author(s):  
Sholahuddin Al-Fatih
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Regulatory Testing ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Bureaucratic Reform

Post-reform of the role of judicial institution is run by two institutions namely the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. The duties and authorities of the two institutions are regulated in the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia 1945 and the act that addresses the three institutions more specifically. Several powers possessed by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, one of them is the authority to judicial review. The Constitutional Court is authorized to review the act on the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia 1945, while the Supreme Court is authorized to review under the Act on the above legislation.The unfairness of the regulatory testing function is feared to trigger bureaucratic inefficiency. Based on data released by the Supreme Court Clerk, it was recorded during 2016 that the Supreme Court received 18,514 cases, including the Hak Uji Materi (HUM) subject to legislation under the Act. While the number of cases of judicial review of the Constitutional Court in 2016-2017 amounted to only 332 cases. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a bureaucratic reform and provide new ideas related to the model of one court of judicial review in Indonesia. So that in this paper will be discussed deeply about problematic of judicial review in Indonesia and the authority of the Constitutional Court to review the act under one roof with SIJURI mechanism.

scholarly journals POLITIK HUKUM PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN TERHADAP ANAK LUAR NIKAH

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 114-126
Author(s):  
Muammar Rachman
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Research Problem ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Marriage Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Status

The formation of the 1974 Marriage Law is based on Islamic Law, which became a problem when the Constitutional Court gave a decision on the judicial review of the Marriage Law with a decision that was considered by the public that the decision was against Islamic law. The research problem in this article is, How is the Politics of Law in the Reform of Legislation in the Post-Constitutional Court Ruling on Marriage related to the status of children outside of marriage? Does the Constitutional Court Decision No 46 / PUU-VII / 2010 contradict Islamic law?The research approach used in this research is normative juridical. The results of the study indicate that children who are born must receive legal protection. If this is not the case, then the children who are born outside of marriage will suffer losses. The relationship between the child and the father does not only occur because of a legal marriage, but can also be based on evidence of a blood relationship between the child and the boy as the father. This is because birth is a legal result of a legal relationship in which there are reciprocal rights and obligations between the child, mother and father. This decision refers, because there is a relationship that is carried out without any legal conditions for marriage, both religiously and in a state, so that it does not cause harm which implies a child who has not done anything wrong. In conclusion, the Constitutional Court granted the renewal of the norm in article 43 of the Marriage Law No. 1 of 1974, which is to provide constitutional rights for children born out of wedlock whether born from a legally valid marriage or not. The decision of the Constitutional Court related to the addition of article 43 paragraph (1) of this marriage law is still in the spirit of Islam as the struggle of Muslims to be able to apply their religious values in this law is not only legally religiously or nationally. Abstrak Pembentukan Undang-Undang (UU) Perkawinan Tahun 1974 berdasarkan Hukum Islam, menjadi permasalahan saat Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) memutuskan judicial review atas UU perkawinan, bagi masyarakat bertentangan dengan hukum Islam. Permasalahan penelitian ini,  Bagaimana Politik Hukum dalam Pembaharuan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan dalam UU Perkawinan Pasca Putusan MK terkait dengan status anak diluar nikah? Apakah Putusan MK No 46/PUU-VII/2010 bertentangan dengan hukum Islam? Pendekatan penelitian ini yuridis normatif. Hasil penelitian menguraikan, anak yang lahir harus mendapat perlindungan hukum. Jika tidak, yang dirugikan adalah anak yang dilahirkan diluar perkawinan. hubungan anak dengan bapak tidak semata-mata terjadi karena adanya sebuah perkawinan yang sah, tapi berdasar pembuktian adanya hubungan darah antara anak dan laki-laki sebagai bapak. Hal ini karena kelahiran adalah akibat hukum dari hubungan hukum yang terdapat hak dan kewajiban secara timbal balik. Putusan ini mengacu, sebab adanya hubungan yang dilakukan tanpa adanya syarat pernikahan yang sah, baik secara agamadan negara, sehingga tidak menimbulkan kerugian yang berimplikasi pada anak yang tidak melakukan kesalahan. Pembaharuan norma dalam pasal 43 UU  Perkawinan No. 1 Tahun 1974, memberikan hak konstitusional  anak yang dilahirkan di luar nikah baik yang lahir dari pernikahan yang sah secara agama atau tidak. Putusan MK terkait penambahan pasal 43 ayat (1) UU perkawinan masih bernafaskan Islam sesuai perjuangan ummat Islam untuk dapat menjalankan nilai-nilai agamanya dalam UU ini hannya tidak sah secara agama  dan Negara.

scholarly journals Constitutional Complaint and the Protection of Citizens the Constitutional Rights

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
I Dewa Gede Palguna
Keyword(s):  
Public Institution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Public Official ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
Legal Remedy ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Individual Citizen ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Republic

Constitutional complaint is one of important issues to be dealt with by severral countries issues adopting constitutional court in their national legal system and the Federal Constitutional Court Germany (Bundesverfassungsgericht) is considered by expert as one of the most advance mechanism among countries in dealing with the issue. Generally speaking, constitutional complaint can be described as a complaint or lawsuit filed by an individual citizen who deems his or her constitutional right (s) has been violates by act or omission of public institution or public official. Mostly, such a complaint can only be filed it theere is no other legal remedy available or all legal remedies available have been exhausted. The Constitutional Court of The Republic of Indonesia however is not entrusted with authority to hear constitutional complaint case not withstanding the fact that statistical data on judicial review cases filed by many petitioners before the Court were substantially constitutional complaint issues. It means that, empirically giving the Court to hear constitutional complaint case is necessarily pivotal and theoritically, the Court has the very foundation to be entrusted withq such authority. Considering the complex mechanism to amend the Constitution of 1945, which exhaustively deserible the court’s authorities, this article offers the lawmaker a theoretical insight tio give the Court a limited authority to hear constitutional complaint case by the way of amending the law on Constitutional Court.

scholarly journals Modderklip Revisited: Can Courts Compel the State to Expropriate Property where the Eviction of Unlawful Occupiers is not Just and Equitable?

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Jackie Dugard
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The State ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Western Cape ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Republic

This article examines whether, to give effect to the section 26 constitutional right to adequate housing, courts can (or should) compel the state to expropriate property in instances when it is not just and equitable to evict unlawful occupiers from privately-owned land (unfeasible eviction). This question was first raised in the Modderklip case, where both the Supreme Court of Appeal (Modder East Squatters v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty) Ltd; President of the Republic of South Africa v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty) Ltd 2004 3 All SA 169 (SCA)) and Constitutional Court (President of the Republic of South Africa v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty) Ltd 2005 5 SA 3 (CC)). dodged the question, opting instead to award constitutional damages to the property owner for the long-term occupation of its property by unlawful occupiers. It is clear from cases such as Ekurhuleni Municipality v Dada 2009 4 SA 463 (SCA), that, mindful of separation of powers concerns, courts have until very recently been unwilling to order the state to expropriate property in such circumstances. At the same time, it is increasingly evident that the state has failed to fulfil its constitutional obligations to provide alternative accommodation for poor communities. In this context, this article argues that there is a growing need for the judiciary to consider, as part of its role to craft effective remedies for constitutional rights violations, the issue of judicial expropriation. It does so, first, through an analysis of the relevant jurisprudence on evictions sought by private landowners and, second, through an in-depth engagement of the recent Western Cape High Court case, Fischer v Persons Listed on Annexure X to the Notice of Motion and those Persons whose Identity are Unknown to the Applicant and who are Unlawfully Occupying or Attempting to Occupy Erf 150 (Remaining Extent) Phillipi, Cape Division, Province of the Western Cape; Stock v Persons Unlawfully Occupying Erven 145, 152, 156, 418, 3107, Phillipi & Portion 0 Farm 597, Cape Rd; Copper Moon Trading 203 (Pty) Ltd v Persons whose Identities are to the Applicant Unknown and who are Unlawfully Occupying Remainder Erf 149, Phillipi, Cape Town 2018 2 SA 228 (WCC).    

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 Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Terhadap Pembubaran Partai Politik Di Indonesia

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-239
Author(s):  
Hasir Budiman Ritonga
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Party Members ◽  
The Republic

Judicial power in Indonesia under the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia shall be exercised by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. One of the authority of the Constitutional Court according to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia is to decide the dissolution of political parties. The facts in the current Indonesian system of ketatanegaran no cases of political parties that were dissolved through the decision of the Constitutional Court, it's just that the problem is when the Constitutional Court uses its authority to break the dissolution of political parties there are things that are formal juridically there is no clear rules, such as the legal status of party members who are not directly involved in the violation committed by the party and the status of party members who hold the position of members of the legislature both at the center and in the regions. So for that must be resolved by emphasizing the certainty, justice and benefit in the decision of the constitutional court

scholarly journals PENEMUAN HUKUM HAKIM MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 21/PUU-XII/2014.MK KASUS PROYEK BIOMEDIASI PT.CHEVRON BACHTIAR ABDUL FATAH

Yustitia ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-237
Author(s):  
Ujang Suratno
Keyword(s):  
Field Research ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Joint Decision ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Library Studies ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

Judicial authority in Indonesia is carried out by a Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court which has the authority to examine laws against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and decide on the authority dispute of state institutions whose authority is granted by the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. The Constitutional Court in examining the Law against the 1945 Constitution became a polemic related to the prejudicial object which was finally answered through the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) number 21 / PUU-XII / 2014. The Constitutional Court granted part of the application for corruption convictions in the case of PT Chevron Bachtiar's Abdul Fatah biomediation project, one of which examined the prejudicial object provisions which were polemic, especially after the South Jakarta District Court's prejudicial has canceled the status of suspect Commissioner Budi Gunawan (BG) by the KPK. This study is a legal research using a normative juridical approach and descriptive analytical research specifications. The data used in this study are secondary data consisting of primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials. Data obtained through library studies and field research in the form of legislation, books, journals, and authoritative electronic media. The results of this study are 2 (two) explanations, namely First, Constitutional Court Judges have made legal inventions by providing interpretations and limitations on what can be the object of prejudicial in criminal procedural law by testing it against the constitution and seeing whether the KUHAP Articles tested are contradictory with constitutional rights. Secondly, the Constitutional Court uses several interactive techniques used by member judges in decision number 21 / PUU-XII / 2014. In the joint decision, the judges used Authentic, Systematic, Grammatical, Historical, Extensively and sociological interpretation techniques. This can be seen in the decision of point one stating a phrase which means interpreting the law using grammatical techniques

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document