The Settlement of Boundary Disputes Through Testing of Legislation in Indonesia

Boundary dispute is a new phenomenon that occurred in the era of regional autonomy followed by the expansion of the region. One of them occurred between Kepulauan Riau and Jambi Provinces related to Berhala Island ownership. Settlement of disputes between these two provinces took quite a long time and also caused tensions between two provinces. Actually, the government through the Ministry of Home Affairs has issued a regulation to solve the boundary problem of this area namely the Minister of Home Affairs Regulation No.1 in 2006 and No. 76 in 2012 on Guidelines for Confirmation of the Boundaries, however, is still less effective because although it has been done in such a way the party who feels aggrieved still take another way that is by testing the legislation to the Supreme Court or Mahkamah Konstitusional (Constitutional Court). An example is the boundary dispute between Kepulauan Riau and Jambi Province which was resolved through the examination of legislation to the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. In the case, there were 3 decisions, namely Supreme Court Decision No.49P/HUM/2011, Decision of the Constitutional Court No. 32/PUU-X/2012 and the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 62/PUU-X/2012. Based on the research results obtained as follows 1). Implementation of the principle or legal principle of lex posterior derogat lex priori by the Supreme Court 2). The decision of the Supreme Court was taken into consideration in the decision of the Constitutional Court 3). The cause of the territorial boundary disputes between Kepulauan Riau Province and Jambi Province was the synchronization of 3 related laws namely Indonesian Law no. 31 in 2003, Law no. 25 in 2002 and Law no. 54 of 1999.

Download Full-text

DEKADENSI PEMILIHAN HAKIM AGUNG OLEH DPR RI

Bilancia: Jurnal Studi Ilmu Syariah dan Hukum ◽

10.24239/blc.v14i1.509 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 14 (1) ◽

pp. 73-104

Author(s):

Rustam Magun Pikahulan

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Rule Of Law ◽

House Of Representatives ◽

Good Governance ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Due Diligence ◽

The Rule Of Law ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Institutional Status ◽

The Government

Abstract: The Plato's conception of the rule of law states that good governance is based on good law. The organization also spreads to the world of Supreme Court justices, the election caused a decadence to the institutional status of the House of Representatives as a people's representative in the government whose implementation was not in line with the decision of the Constitutional Court. Based on the decision of the Constitutional Court No.27/PUU-XI/2013 explains that the House of Representatives no longer has the authority to conduct due diligence and suitability (elect) to prospective Supreme Judges proposed by the Judicial Commission. The House of Representatives can only approve or disapprove candidates for Supreme Court Justices that have been submitted by the Judicial Commission. In addition, the proportion of proposed Supreme Court Justices from the judicial commission to the House of Representatives (DPR) has changed, whereas previously the Judicial Commission had to propose 3 (three) of each vacancy for the Justices, now it is only one of each vacant for Supreme Court Judges. by the Supreme Court. The House of Representatives no longer has the authority to conduct due diligence and suitability (elect) to prospective Supreme Judges proposed by the Judicial Commission. The House of Representatives can only "approve" or "disagree" the Supreme Judge candidates nominated by the Judicial Commission.

Download Full-text

The Right to Assisted Dying: Constitutional Jurisprudence and Its Impact in Canada, Germany and Austria

ICL Journal ◽

10.1515/icl-2021-0008 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 0 (0) ◽

Author(s):

Kerstin Braun

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Supreme Court Of Canada ◽

Assisted Dying ◽

Constitutional Courts ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Federal Constitutional ◽

The Right ◽

Constitutional Jurisprudence

Abstract Many states are grappling with the regulation of assistance in suicide and ending the life of another upon their request. Initially punishable in most countries, a growing number of jurisdictions have now introduced permissive frameworks decriminalising, to varying degrees, rendering assistance in dying. Other countries, however, have proceeded with the criminal prohibition and several courts have upheld the lawfulness of the respective criminal laws during human rights and constitutional challenges. Yet, the Supreme Court of Canada in 2015, the German Federal Constitutional Court in February 2020 and the Austrian Constitutional Court in December 2020 have respectively declared unconstitutional and void national criminal laws prohibiting rendering assistance in dying. This article first outlines the criminal law framework relating to assisted dying in Canada, Germany and Austria. It subsequently analyses the judgments before pondering their impact on the legal landscape in the three countries. The article concludes that while the Canadian Supreme Court decision appears to have had a significant impact on the introduction of subsequent legislation in Canada, the effects of the Constitutional Courts’ judgments seem much more subdued in Germany and are yet to unfold in Austria.

Download Full-text

PEMBUBARAN PARTAI POLITIK DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN INDONESIA

Jurnal Hukum ◽

10.26532/jh.v26i2.212 ◽

1970 ◽

Vol 26 (2) ◽

pp. 612

Author(s):

Widayati

Keyword(s):

Political Parties ◽

Supreme Court ◽

Political Party ◽

District Court ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Members Of Parliament ◽

The People ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Government

Indonesia is a sovereign country folk. One implementation of the sovereignty of the people is the election that followed by political parties for members of Parliament and members of parliament and individuals for DPD.Political parties are the main pillars of democracy. Establishment of political parties must meet the requirements in accordance with legislation. Terms of founding a political party regulated under Article 2 of Law No. 2 of 2008 on Political Parties.As the main pillar of democracy, political parties should be able to carry out its functions properly. There are some restrictions on political parties, among others, are prohibited from engaging in activities contrary to the Constitution of 1945 NRI and legislation; engage in activities that endanger the integrity and safety Homeland. If the ban is violated, then the government may ask the parties to the freezing of the District Court. If the parties do not accept the decision of freezing the District Court, it can be appealed to the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court confirmed the decision of the PN, then the Government may propose the dissolution of the parties to the Court.The procedure by which parties to the Court daitur dissolution under Article 68 paragraph (1) and (2) of Law No 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court. Constitutional Court's decision regarding the request for the dissolution of political parties must be decided upon within a period of 60 (sixty) days after pemoohonan recorded in the Register of Case Constitution.Keywords: Parati dissolution of political, constitutional systemIndonesia

Download Full-text

PENJARA TERHADAP DOKTER DALAM PERSPEKTIF MENGIKATNYA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DAN PEMIDANAAN INTEGRATIF

Jurnal Yudisial ◽

10.29123/jy.v10i1.42 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. 59

Author(s):

Warih Anjari

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Medical Profession ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Court Decision ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Court Ruling ◽

Binding Force ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Negative Impacts ◽

Sentencing Theory

ABSTRAKKekuatan mengikat putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi bersifat final dan mengikat. Namun Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 4/PUU-V/2007 tidak ditaati oleh Putusan Nomor 1110 K/Pid.Sus/2012. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi telah menganulir ancaman pidana penjara dalam Pasal 75 ayat (1), Pasal 76, dan Pasal 79 Undang-Undang Nomor 29 Tahun 2004 tentang Praktik Kedokteran. Putusan Mahkamah Agung tetap menjatuhkan pidana penjara terhadap dokter yang melanggar pasal tersebut. Kondisi ini menimbulkan ketidaksesuaian antara kekuatan mengikat putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dan tujuan penjatuhan pidana yang integratif berdasarkan Pancasila. Masalah dalam tulisan ini adalah bagaimanakah implikasi Putusan Nomor 1110 K/Pid.Sus/2012 dikaitkan dengan kekuatan mengikat Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi? Dan bagaimanakah implikasi penjatuhan pidana penjara bagi dokter yang tercantum dalam Putusan Nomor 1110 K/ Pid.Sus/2012 dikaitkan dengan teori tujuan pemidanaan integratif? Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam tulisan ini adalah metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan kasus. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi memiliki sifat erga ormes sehingga harus diikuti oleh Mahkamah Agung. Pidana penjara terhadap dokter yang tidak menggunakan izin praktik tidak dapat mencapai tujuan pemidanaan integratif. Akibatnya pelayanan kesehatan bagi masyarakat tidak terlayani, dan merugikan profesi dokter. Kesimpulannya adalah putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tidak mempunyai kekuatan mengikat sehingga menjadi tidak efektif dan tujuan pemidanaan integratif berdasarkan Pancasila tidak tercapai.Kata kunci: pidana penjara, kekuatan putusan, tujuan pemidanaan integratif.ABSTRACTThe binding force of the Constitutional Court ruling is final. However, the Supreme Court Decision Number 1110 K/Pid.Sus/2012 does not abide by the Constitutional Court Decision Number 4/PUU-V/2007. The Constitutional Court Decision has annulled the imprisonment penalties in Article 75 paragraph (1), Article 76, Article 79 of Law Number 29 of 2004 concerning Medical Practices. The Supreme Court in its decision imposed the sanction of imprisonment on the doctors violating the aforementioned articles. This condition lead to such a discrepancy between the final and binding decision of the Constitutional Court and the integrated purposes of sentencing under Pancasila. Formulation of the problems in this analysis meets some points on how the implication of the Supreme Court Decision Number 1110 K/Pid.Sus/2012 regarding the binding force of the Constitutional Court Decision; and how the implication of the imposition of imprisonment sanction for a list of doctors stated in the Supreme Court Decision Number 1110 K/Pid.Sus/2012 in terms of integrated objective of sentencing theory. The research method is a normative juridical by case-based approach. The nature of the decision of the Constitutional Court is erga omnes, that obliges the Supreme Court to act upon. The sanction of imprisonment against the doctors with no consent practices cannot reach the integrated purpose of sentencing. As a consequence, the health services to communities are abandoned and this bring negative impacts on medical profession. To be brief, the decision of the Constitutional Court is considered futile with no binding force, accordingly the integrated purpose of sentencing under Pancasila could not be achieved.Keywords: imprisonment, binding force of ruling, integrated purpose of sentencing.

Download Full-text

Problematika Pengujian Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Mahkamah Agung ( Kajian Terhadap Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 65 P/HUM/2018)

SASI ◽

10.47268/sasi.v27i1.417 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 27 (1) ◽

pp. 61

Author(s):

Suparto Suparto

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Court Decision ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Stage Process ◽

Legal Consequence ◽

Election Commission ◽

Legal Implication ◽

Laws And Regulations

The Supreme Court (MA) decided that candidates for members of the Regional Representative Council (DPD) from political party administrators for the 2019 Election were still allowed, even though previously the Constitutional Court (MK) had banned it (Decision No. This conflict is due to differences in interpreting the timing of the implementation of the ongoing 2019 Election stage process. The Constitutional Court stated that the decision was enforced since the 2019 Election and this was not retroactive. Because it is still at the Provisional Candidate List (DCS) stage, so it is possible to change regulations. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court considers that the Constitutional Court's decision must be enforced after the 2019 Election or apply in the future (prospective), because the stages have been running, so that changes in requirements can be made The legal implication that occurs is that there is legal uncertainty for the General Election Commission (KPU) to follow which decision. To solve this problem can be used the doctrine of validity (enforceability of norms). The existence of a hierarchy of legal products being tested and a basis for testing certainly has a legal consequence of the existence of a hierarchy of norm validity in the decisions of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. When there is a conflict between the Supreme Court decision and the Constitutional Court, the verdict with the basis and object of examination in the hierarchy of laws and regulations that is higher, namely the Constitutional Court decision, has a higher validity than the Supreme Court decision. So that problems like this do not exist anymore, testing of laws and regulations should only be carried out by one institution, namely the Constitutional Court.

Download Full-text

Refleksi Konstitusionalitas Pengawasan Peraturan Daerah Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 137/PUU-XIII/2015

Jurnal Konstitusi ◽

10.31078/jk1629 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 16 (2) ◽

pp. 391

Author(s):

Firdaus Firdaus

Keyword(s):

Local Government ◽

Supreme Court ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Central Government ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Legal Standing ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Government ◽

And Function ◽

The Relationship

Peraturan Daerah (Perda) sebagai produk hukum pemerintahan daerah untuk mengatur dan memerintah sendiri sebagai manifestasi otonomi, tetapi dalam praktiknya sering kali dihadapkan dengan penundaan atau pembatalan akibat fungsi pengawasan preventif atau represif oleh Pemerintah. Melalui Putusan Nomor 137/PUU-XIII/2015, Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) meneguhkan fungsi pengawasan preventif dan membatalkan fungsi pengawasan represif dengan harapan: pertama mengakhiri dilema konstitusional fungsi Pengawasan Pemerintah terhadap Perda; kedua, memperkuat otonomi daerah; dan ketiga, meneguhkan pengujian perda sebagai kompetensi Mahkamah Agung (MA). Namun hal tersebut justru menciptakan dikotomi baru, baik terkait hubungan Pemerintah Pusat dengan pemerintahan daerah maupun dalam memaknai fungsi pengawasan represif dihubungkan dengan kompetensi MA menguji peraturan perundang-undangan di bawah undang-undang terhadap undang-undang. Bentuk dikotomi baru yang dimaksud; pertama, merevitalisasi instrumen sentralisme; dan kedua mereduksi otonomi dan fungsi kekuasaan Pemerintah dengan karakteristik yang bersifat aktif, sepihak (bersegi satu) dalam mengawasi dan memastikan pelaksanaan undangundang. Dimensi konstitusional yang harus dipastikan, bahwa pelaksanaan fungsi pengawasan represif terhadap Perda memberi kedudukan hukum bagi Pemerintah Daerah otonom untuk dapat mengajukan permohonan pengujian kepada MA.Local Regulation (Perda) as a legal product of local government is to regulate and govern itself as a manifestation of autonomy. Yet, in practice it is often confronted with delays or cancellations due to the Government's preventive or repressive supervision functions. Through Decision Number 137 / PUU-XIII / 2015, the Constitutional Court (MK) affirmed the function of preventive supervision and canceled the repressive supervision function in the hope of: first, ending the constitutional dilemma of the Government Oversight function on Local Regulations; second, strengthening local autonomy; and third, confirm the perda review as Supreme Court (MA) competency. However, this actually creates a new dichotomy, both in relation to the relationship between the Central Government and the local government and in interpreting the repressive monitoring function associated with the MA competency in examining the legislation under the regulations toward the statute. The form of the new dichotomy in intended; firstly, revitalize the instrument of centralism; and secondly reducing the autonomy and function of the Government's power with active, unilateral (onesided) characteristics in supervising and ensuring the implementation of the statute. The constitutional dimension that must be ensured is that the implementation of the repressive oversight function of the Local Regulation gives a legal standing for the autonomous local Government to be able to submit an application for judicial review to the Supreme Court.

Download Full-text

COVID-19 may prompt more Malawian election controversy

Emerald Expert Briefings ◽

10.1108/oxan-db252246 ◽

2020 ◽

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Presidential Elections ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Court Ruling ◽

Content Type ◽

Legal Challenge ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Electoral Reforms ◽

The Government

Subject Malawi election controversies. Significance The Supreme Court is currently hearing a legal challenge to February’s Constitutional Court ruling nullifying last year’s election of President Peter Mutharika. While fresh presidential elections are now set to take place on July 2, Mutharika continues to dispute the nullification of last year’s result and has refused to give his assent to recent electoral reforms. Now there are concerns over whether a credible new poll can be held amid a State of Disaster and a proposed nationwide lockdown to combat COVID-19. Impacts Recent attempts by the government to tackle longstanding grievances among the army are likely an attempt by Mutharika to keep it on side. International actors are unlikely to condemn any fresh polls strongly, even if there are concerns over their credibility. Public protests could be reignited if Mutharika reappoints the MEC’s tainted leadership or elections are delayed.

Download Full-text

Hapusnya Wewenang Executive Review Pemerintah terhadap Peraturan Daerah: Studi Pasca-adanya Putusan MK Nomor 137/PUU-XIII/2015 dan Nomor 56/PUU XIV/2016

ADIL Jurnal Hukum ◽

10.33476/ajl.v10i2.1222 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Lusy Liany

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Review Process ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Government Control ◽

Legal Principles ◽

Internal Affair ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Government ◽

Legal Opinion

The Constitutional Court, on April 4, 2017, through the Decision No.137/PUU-XIII/2015 has invalidated the enactment of the rules that enabled a Governor to annul Regency/City Laws. On June 14, 2017, with the Decision No.56/PUU-XIV/2016, the Court also invalidated the authority of Ministry of Internal Affair to void Provincial Laws. These decisions brought about a question on whether the government still has the authority to revise those regional laws or it can only be taken through the material review to the judiciary. Based on the background, the authors formulated two problems. Firstly, what is the mechanism of government control of the Regional Regulation after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 137 / PUU-XIII / 2015 and the Court's Decision Number 56/PUU-XIV/2016? Secondly, what are the obstacles to judicial review of regional regulations in the Supreme Court? The research method applied in this paper is a normative method in which qualitative data are gathered and the statute and conceptual approaches are employed. First result, the government, both the Minister of Internal Affairs and the Governor, can oversee the regional law-making process through the executive preview mechanism and the annulation of both Province and Regency/City Laws is in the domain of the Supreme Court's authority. Second, the judicial review process in the Supreme Court has not fully met the legal principles of judicial review process, as it is not open to public, there is no deadline to finish the trial, and the Supreme Court’s decision is not supported by sufficient details of judges’ legal opinion.

Download Full-text

THE DUALISM OF THE SUPREME COURT’S DECISIONS ON THE POSITION OF NON-MARITAL CHILD

JURNAL HUKUM DAN PERADILAN ◽

10.25216/jhp.8.2.2019.228-254 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 228

Author(s):

Nurhadi Nurhadi

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Islamic Law ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Court Decision ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Literature Study ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Pros And Cons ◽

Religious Courts ◽

Unmarried Child

Since the birth of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 46/PUU-VIII/2010, the legal experts have discussed the positions of marriage children through articles, papers, books and seminars, pros and cons when interpreting the non-marital child, judges also gave birth to many interpretations. The Supreme Court (MA) has two views in adjudicating the marriage case, Supreme Court Decision Number 329 K/AG/2014 states that the ratification of an unmarried child is not a jurisdiction of the Religious Courts, whereas in Decision of Supreme Court Number 597 K/AG/2015 states that the non-marital children are legitimate even though the marriage of their parents only carries out marriage under Islamic law. The formulation of the problem is how the criteria of marital legitimacy in Indonesia? How is the outsider interpretation of the two Supreme Court decisions? The research method used is literature study, with the type of normative legal research, which is descriptive analytical. The conclusion is that in Supreme Court Decision Number 329 K/AG/2014 considered the marriage to be legitimately religious, but because it is not recorded so that the marriage does not get the certainty and protection of the law, consequently the child born from the marriage is not a legal child, whereas in Decision Number 597 K/AG/2015 The Supreme Court considers that although the marriage is not recorded, the child born from the marriage must still have legal certainty and protection so that the child is considered a legal child.

Download Full-text

Judicial Review On The Authority Of National Institution In The Disbanding Of Community Organization Who Are Contradicting The 1945 Constitution Of The Republic Of Indonesia

Archives of Business Research ◽

10.14738/abr.712.7451 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 7 (12) ◽

pp. 1-18

Author(s):

Theo Negoro ◽

Demson Tiopan ◽

Haykal Hassanain

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Government Regulation ◽

Community Organization ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Community Organizations ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Temporary Suspension ◽

The Republic ◽

The Government

A community organization who contradicts the constitution will obviously disturb the common order and also disturb the system of Indonesian people and the nation itself, especially if such organization aims to change the Indonesian constitution. In Chapter XVII of Law Number 17 of 2013 regarding Community Organization, later known as the Community Organization Law, it is stated that the disbanding of community organization must go through a procedure which consist of a warning, temporary suspension and then the disbanding by the court of law. In the Community Organization Law, the disbanding of an organization is done by a Judicative Institution which is through the decision of a judicial board. However, the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 2 of 2017 regarding the Amendment on Law Number 17 of 2013 regarding Community Organization, later known as the Government Regulation in Lieu of Community Organization Law states that the disbanding of a Community Organization contradicting the constitution only goes through the administrative admonition, temporary suspension of activity, and later the revocation of listed certification or the revocation of lawful institution status by the Government. The purpose of this research is to discover the authority of National Institution in disbanding Community Organization that contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and also the authoritative obstacle faced by the national institution in dissolving such organizations. This research is a normative one which researched existing secondary data as a literary data supported by empirical data acquired from interview processes. Result of the research shows that the governmental institution which in this case are the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and Judicative Institution which in this case the Supreme Court has authority to disband Community Organizations that contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia based on normative terms. However, in order to establish justice on said organization, the disbanding must be done by Judicative Institution so that it is more objective, but not by the Supreme Court, but by the Constitutional Court, due to the existence of Public Organizations being closely related to the Constitutional Right the way it is for the Political Parties. This research suggests that the disbanding of Community Organizations that contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia should be done by the Constitutional Court, preceded by material check on the applicable positive law. Keywords: Authority; National Institution; Community Organization; Constitution

Download Full-text