scholarly journals MENALAR URGENSI PENGHAPUSAN UJIAN NASIONAL DEMI KEADILAN SISWA, GURU DAN SEKOLAH PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR: 2596 K/PDT/2008

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Aufi Imaduddin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
National Level ◽  
Educational Thought ◽  
National Examination ◽  
Existing Problems ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Laws And Regulations

The national exam is a form of national level learning evaluation that has been set by the government to determine student learning outcomes. However, in the implementation of the national exam has a negative impact on students, teachers and schools. So lately there has been a renewed discourse about the elimination of the national examination, it began with the policy of the Indonesian Minister of Education and Culture to abolish the national examination in 2021. Especially if we examine further that legal efforts to stop the implementation of the national examination have existed since 2006 and the peak in 2009 was the decision of the Supreme Court number: 2596 K / PDT / 2008 which in essence required the government to stop the implementation of the national examination before resolving various existing problems. Therefore, the writer is interested in asking logically to think about the urgency of abolishing the national exam after the decision of the Supreme Court. In this paper, the method used by the author is a qualitative method based on social facts that occur based on juridical reasons based on the laws and regulations related to research. The results of this study found that the implementation of the national exam has claimed justice for students in obtaining their human rights in obtaining education that has been mentioned in the 1945 Constitution and is not in accordance with educational thought according to Ki Hajar Dewantara, as well as causing various depressive pressures which have an impact on their minds stressed and suicidal students. The implementation of national exams has also revoked justice for teachers, where teachers in their teaching are supposed to educate students well and develop their students' thinking instincts, with the national examination the teacher only drills students to memorize and do exercises that lead to the national exam. Recalling also that the implementation of national examinations in a juridical manner in the decision of the Supreme Court has violated various laws and regulations regarding education in Indonesia. Therefore, the elimination of the national exam will give back the right to justice for students, teachers and schools according to their respective proportions.

scholarly journals PENGAKUAN TERHADAP PIHAK NON-ADVOKAT DALAM PEMBERIAN BANTUAN HUKUM (Politik Hukum Bantuan Hukum Dalam Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia)

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 399
Author(s):  
Akmal Adicahya
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
State Law ◽  
Legal Aid ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Law Student

Access to justice is everyone rights that have to be fulfilled by the government. The regulation number 16 year 2011 of legal aid is an instrument held by the government to guarantee the right. The regulation allowed the participation of non-advocates to provide the legal aid. Through this policy, government emphasizes that:1) Indonesia is a state law which legal aid is an obliged instrument; 2) the prohibition of non-advocate to participate in legal aid is not relevant due to inadequate amount of advocate and citizen seek for justice (justiciabelen), and the advocate is not widely extended throughout Indonesia; 3) Non-Advocates, especially lecturer and law student are widely spread; 4) there are no procedural law which prohibits non-advocate to provide a legal aid. Those conditions are enough argument for government to strengthen the participation of non-advocates in providing legal aid. Especially for The Supreme Court to revise The Book II of Guidance for Implementing Court’s Job and Administration.Keywords: legal aid, non-advocate, justice

Ensuring Food Security

2017 ◽  
pp. 221-247
Author(s):  
Rajesh Chakrabarti ◽  
Kaushiki Sanyal
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Political Support ◽  
Advocacy Coalition ◽  
Right To Food ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Election Manifesto ◽  
The Government ◽  
Draft Bill ◽  
The Right

This chapter narrates the saga of the Right to Food Security. Briefly pointing out various prior food movements, the chapter dates the movement to 2001 in Rajasthan with a writ petition at the Supreme Court. The SC took up the issue with surprising enthusiasm issuing order after order to force the government to comply with reports and action. The government, while not antagonistic, was apathetic. Encouraged by the court orders the activists gathered under a single banner of Right to Food Campaign in 2004 and built on the campaign in court as well as on the ground. Political support finally came when the issue entered UPA’s election manifesto in 2009. Post UPA victory, the NAC submitted its draft bill in 2010 but a substantially altered bill finally got enacted in 2013. The movement reflects a combination of Punctuated Equilibrium Framework and Advocacy Coalition Framework.

Zee Films and the BCCI: The Award of Broadcasting Rights

2017 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Akhileshwar Pathak
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Judicial Interpretation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

The case discusses the issues related to Zee Tele Films Limited's claims that the Board of Cricket Control of India was “state” and could act arbitrarily in the award of telecasting rights. The “state” as defined in Article 12 includes “other authorities”, and these are subject to the constitutional limitations. The right to equality requires them to not act arbitrarily. A body which is an instrumentality or agency of the government is “other authority”. The term has been subject to judicial interpretation. The Supreme Court, by a majority judgement, in the Zee Tele Films Case ruled that the Board is not “other authorities” within Article 12 of the Constitution.

scholarly journals PIERWSZY BANK STANÓW ZJEDNOCZONYCH JAKO PIERWOWZÓR SYSTEMU REZERWY FEDERALNEJ

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 171
Author(s):  
Wojciech Kwiatkowski
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Federal Reserve ◽  
Financial Stability ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Government ◽  
Banking Institution ◽  
The Right

First Bank of the United States as a Prototype for the Federal Reserve SystemSummaryThe article describes the history of the First Bank of the United Statesfirst banking- institution, that was charted in XVII-th century North America as an effect of a cooperation of two federal bodies – Congress and the President. Although, the federal government possessed only 20 %, of the shares with federal licences it could conduct its activity on territory of the whole country. Moreover – the Bank is now referred to as the first central bank in the United States because of its national scope and services rendered to the federal government. The Bank helped the government to obtain emergency loans, facilitated the payment of taxes, and served as the receiver and disburser of the public funds. In addition, it issued bank notes and made them fully redeemable in coin. During a 20-years period the Bank achieved a commercial success and maintained a financial stability. However, in 1811 Congress did not renew the charter because the Bank’s constitutionality was questioned.Alexander Hamilton (the first U.S. Secretary of the Treasury), who was [the followerof creation of the bank, already in 1790 assumed that the federal government had the power to charter banks because the Constitution granted the government the right to establish institutions necessary for its operations. Addifferent viewpoint was presented by Thomas Jefferson who favored a more decentralized government and believed that only the states could charter banks under the Constitution. Furthermore – because the Constitution did not expressly grant the power to Congress, he reasoned that federally chartered banks were unconstitutional. Finally in 1819, as a far-reaching decision, the Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall followed Hamilton’s reasoning and ruled in case McCulloch vs Maryland that the Second Bank of the United States was constitutional. For U.S. federal government this decision of the Supreme Court was very important about 200 years later – in 1913, when president Wilson, many politicians’ and main U.S. bankers decided to create the Federal Reserve System.

scholarly journals JUDICIAL REVIEW SEBAGAI SARANA PERLINDUNGAN HAK-HAK ASASI WARGA NEGARA

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (22) ◽  
pp. 170-181
Author(s):  
Safi’ Safi’
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Recent Time ◽  
Public Acceptance ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Community Groups ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Observing the development of public acceptance of the substance of the laws that were generated in recent time, the right of judicial review of an option that can not be avoided for the 'correct' errors that might occur in a legal product to guarantee the protection of constitutional rights of citizens. The tendency in this direction can be seen from the desire of some community groups to apply for judicial review and claim that they are legal products containing controversial value both to the Supreme Court nor the Constitutional Court. If prior to the amendment of the 1945 Constitution, laws and regulations that can be petitioned for review of material just under the Act against the Constitution, but after the 1945 amendment, the legislation level as the Act was that the Act and also Perpu material can be petitioned for review to the Constitutional Court.

scholarly journals Privacy in the Age of the Internet: Lawful Access Provisions and Access to ISP and OSP Subscriber Information

2016 ◽  
pp. 709
Author(s):  
Graham Mayeda
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Privacy And Security ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Section 8 ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Government ◽  
C 30 ◽  
The Right

Bill C-30 (the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act) and the Protecting Canadians from Online Crime Act are two recent attempts by the Canadian government to create incentives for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and Online Service Providers (OSPs) to disclose the subscriber information of Internet users to government agencies. In this article, the author argues that while such provisions may not violate section 8 of the Charter based on current judicial interpretation, they ought to be found unconstitutional. To date, the Supreme Court of Canada’s search and seizure jurisprudence uses a normative framework that does not distinguish between defining the right to privacy and justifying limitations to it. This approach is not consistent with that taken for other Charter rights. The recent decisions of the Supreme Court in R v. Spencer and R v. Fearon may signal a slight shift, but they do not go far enough. If courts defined privacy interests more broadly than under current law and required the government to justify restrictions on these interests under section 1, this would create a legal regime that achieves a better balance between competing privacy and security interests.

scholarly journals Mempertanyakan Legalitas Qanun Aceh: Sesuaikah dengan Sistem Peraturan Perundang-Undangan

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 273-294
Author(s):  
Andi Muhammad Asrun ◽  
Abdu Rahmat Rosyadi ◽  
Yennie K. Milono
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Formal Method ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Product ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Penelitian ini ingin menjawab kesesuaian Qanun Aceh dengan sistem peraturan perundang-undangan, dengan mengidentifikasi kedudukan qanun dalam sistem peraturan perundang-undangan, dan kewenangan lembaga dalam hak uji materil terhadap qanun sebagai produk hukum. Penelitian ini bersifat yuridis-formil melalui kajian pustaka terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan untuk mendeskripsikan kesesuaian qanun Aceh dalam sistem peraturan perundang-undangan. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa Qanun Aceh ada yang berkaitan dengan penyelenggaraan pemerintahan dan ada yang berkaitan dengan pelaksanaan syariat Islam kedudukannya dianggap sama dengan peraturan daerah pada umumnya dalam perspektif Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2011 tentang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan. Argumentasi yuridis yang menyatakan bahwa qanun sejajar dengan peraturan daerah ini diperkuat oleh Peraturan Menteri Dalam Negeri Republik Indonesia Nomor 53 Tahun 2011 tentang Pembentukan Produk Hukum Daerah. Namun berkenaan dengan hak menguji untuk membatalkan Qanun Aceh dalam pelaksanaan syariat Islam hanya dapat diuji dan dibatalkan melalui judicial review oleh Mahkamah Agung sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 235 ayat (4) UU Nomor 11 Tahun 2006. Asking for Aceh Qanun Legality: Compatible With Legislation System This study aims to answer the compatibility between the Aceh Qanun and the system of legislation by identifying the position of qanun in the system and the authority of the institution in the rights to materially verify qanun as a legal product. This study uses a juridical-formal method through a literature review of the laws and regulations to describe the suitability of the Aceh qanun in the statutory system. This study found that the Aceh Qanun relating to the administration of government and relating to the implementation of Islamic law, its position is considered the same as local regulations in general in the perspective of Law No. 12/2011 on the Formation of Legislation. The juridical argument that states that the qanun is in line with this regional regulation is reinforced by the Republic of Indonesia Minister of Home Affairs Regulation No. 53/2011 on the Establishment of Regional Legal Products. However, the right to examine the cancellation of qanun in the implementation of Islamic Shari'a, it can only be examined and canceled through a judicial review by the Supreme Court as stipulated in Article 235 paragraph (4) of Law Number 11/2006.

scholarly journals Suplicatorio y política: Praxis parlamentaria y claves del debate doctrinal sobre el control jurisdiccional de la potestad denegatoria de los suplicatorios // Request to waive the Parliamentary Immunity and politics. Parliamentary praxis and keys issues of the doctrinal debate on the judicial review of the parliamentary power of denial the requests

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (103) ◽  
pp. 381
Author(s):  
Kayamba Tshitshi Ndouba
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Existing Problems ◽  
Spanish Constitution ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Parliamentary Procedure ◽  
The Right ◽  
Politics And Law

Resumen:El presente artículo aborda algunos problemas entre política y derecho que genera la decisión parlamentaria en la concesión o denegación de los suplicatorios. Por ello, analiza la praxis de los suplicatorios tramitados por el Congreso de los diputados y el Senado hasta la fecha, poniendo énfasis en la doctrina emanada de las decisiones adoptadas por las comisiones parlamentarias competentes. Para profundizar en la interacción entre suplicatorio, política y derecho, el artículo indaga en los pasos cualitativos y saltos prominentes de la evolución de la jurisprudencia constitucional sobre los límites de la facultad de las Cámaras para conceder o denegar el suplicatorio. Recaba y sistematiza el tratamiento académico de los puntos clave del debate emanado de estos sucesivos pronunciamientos del TC: las implicaciones de esta jurisprudencia en relación a los postulados constitucionales de independencia y ordenación de los poderes del Estado, las definiciones de criterios jurídicos que han de inspirar y guiar a las Cámaras para autorizar o denegar el suplicatorio, la concreción del modelo y la estructura de ponderación aplicables en los casos de colisión de dos derechos fundamentales (en este caso, los arts. 23 y 24 de la Constitución española [CE]). Summary:I. Praxis of the Parliamentary Procedure for the Waiver of Immunity. II. The Request to Waive the Parliamentary Immunity Before the Constitutional Court. Issues With Undeniable Constitutional Significance. III. The Constitutional Court and the Judicial Review of the Requests to Waive the Parliamentary Immunity. 1. Interna corporis acta and fundamental rights. 2. «Trial of opportunity» and the formal «requirement of a statement of reasons». 3. The degree of providing an adequate statement of reasons in the denial court’s decision. 4. The question of weighing up different values against one another: fundamental rights and the Parliament members’ prerogatives. IV. The Doctrinal Debate on the Constitutional Court’s Jurisprudence. 1. Emptying the parliamentarian immunity and the issue of «checks and balance» of State’s constitutional powers.2. Opposing the parliamentary immunity and the right of judicial action: the issue of preferential treatment. Concluding: Judicial Review or Political Review? Abstract:This article addresses the existing problems generated by the parliamentary decision in the granting or denial of requests made by the Supreme Court to the Parliament, in order to remove an MP’s parliamentary immunity, so that (s)he can be prosecuted. Such problems are studied both from the perspective of law and of political science. To this end, this paper analyzes and updates the research done to date about the parliamentary praxis on this issue, highlighting the doctrine which emanates from the decisions adopted by the competent parliamentary committees. In order to understand well the interaction between the praxis, politics and law, this paper also examines the most prominent changes and milestones in the evolution of the constitutional case law on the limits of the Parliament’s capacity to grant or to deny the Supreme Court request asking Parliament to remove an MP’s parliamentary immunity so that (s)he can be prosecuted. For this purpose, the paper systematizes the key points of the academic debate concerning the successive decisions of the Constitutional court: the repercussions of this jurisprudence vis-à-vis the constitutional postulates of separation and independence of State powers, the legal criteria that such postulates must inspire and in order to guide the Parliament in its decision to grant or deny the petition, the concretization of the model and the balance needed in cases of collision of two fundamental rights (in this case, articles 23 and 24 of the Spanish Constitution).

scholarly journals PENGATURAN TENTANG PENYELESAIAN KONFLIK NORMA ANTARA PERATURAN MENTERI TERHADAP UNDANG-UNDANG

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 1191
Author(s):  
Maria Virginia Usfunan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Consequences ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui bagaimana pengaturan tentang penyelesaian tentang konflik norma antara peraturan menteri terhadap undang-undang dan unruk mengetahui bagaimana sifat putusan mahkamah agung dalam hak uji material. Metode yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konsep. Pengaturan tentang penyelesaian konflik norma antara Peraturan Menteri Terhadap Undang-Undang, metode penyelesaian konflik norma itu dengan digunakannya asas lex superior derogate lex inferior ini, yang digunakan dengan terjadinya konflik norma antara UU Peraturan Perundang-Undangan dengan Permenkumham Nomor 2 Tahun 2019 terkait pengaturan penyelesaian konflik norma antara peraturan menteri dengan Undang-Undang, maka berdasarkan asas tersebut yang digunakan adalah UU Peraturan Perundang-Undangan, sehingga Permenkumham Nomor 2 Tahun 2019 harus dikesampingkan. Maka, Pengaturan mengenai Penyelesaian Konflik Norma Antara Peraturan Menteri Terhadap Undang-Undang, menjadi kewenangan Mahkamah Agung berdasarkan Pasal 9 UU Peraturan Perundang-Undangan. Dan Sifat Putusan Mahkamah Agung dalam Hak Uji Materiil dalam memberikan putusannya yang pada prinsipnya yang memiliki konsekuensi hukum aturan tersebut apabila terbukti secara sah dan meyakinkan bertentangan dengan aturan di atasnya maka aturan tersebut akan menjadi tidak sah serta tidak berlaku, dan menjadi tanggungjawab instansi terkait untuk mencabutnya. The purpose of the study is to find how adjustment of the settlement of norm conflicts between Ministerial Regulations toward the Constitution and to find out how the nature of the Supreme Court decision in the right of judicial review. The method used was normative legal research method with the legislation approach and concept approach. Adjustment on resolving norms of conflict between Ministerial Regulations toward the Constitution, the method of resolving norms conflicts by using the principle of lex superior derogate lex inferior, which was used in the norm conflicts between the Constitution on Laws and Regulations with Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation Number 2 of 2019 in relation to conflict resolution arrangements the norm between Ministerial Regulations and the Constitution, then based on the principle used was the Constitution on Laws and Regulations, so Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation Number 2 of 2019 must be set aside. Thus, the adjustment on resolving norms of conflict between Ministerial Regulations toward the Constitution became authority of the Supreme Court based on Article 9 of the Constitution on Laws and Regulations. And the nature of the Supreme Court's Decision in the Right to Judge Material in providing its decision which in principle had legal consequences of the rule if it was proven legally and convincingly contrary to the rules above, the rule would be invalid and not applicable, and it was the responsibility of related agencies to revoke it.

scholarly journals The supreme court of Canada and the offender’s right to be transferred to serve his sentence in Canada: interpreting the international transfer of offenders act in light of Canada’s national and international human rights obligations

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 102-123
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Public Safety ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Academic Publications ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

ABSTRACT In September 2013 in the case of Divito v Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) the Supreme Court of Canada dealt with the issue of whether section 6(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Charter, which grants Canadians the right to enter Canada was violated in a case where the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness declined to consent to the transfer of a Canadian citizen to serve his sentence in Canada where the sentencing state had consented to the transfer. Another issue was whether sections 8(1) and 10(1)(a) and 10(2)(a) of the International Transfer of Offenders Act, which granted the Minister the discretion to consent or not to consent to the transfer, were contrary to section 6(1) of the Charter. In resolving the above issues, the Court referred to its earlier jurisprudence, academic publications and international law. Although the Court agreed with the government that the appeal was moot because the appellant had left the USA by the time it was heard, it held that it retained “a residual discretion to decide the merits of a moot appeal if the issues raised are of public importance” and that this case was one of public importance because “[t]he issues are likely to recur in the future and there is some uncertainty resulting from conflicting decisions in the Federal Court.” The purpose of this article is to highlight the interpretative tools invoked by the court and the implications of the judgement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document