The Constitutional Court Interpretation of ‘Indigenous Belief’: An Islamic and 1945 Constitution Perspectives

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Muchammad ICHSAN ◽  
Nanik PRASETYONINGSIH

This study aims to review the Republic of Indonesia's Constitutional Court Decision No. 97/PUU-XIV/2016. The Decision states that the provisions of Law No. 23 of 2006, Article 61(1) and (2) and Article 64(1) and (5) relating to the clearing of the column of religion in the family card and electronic identity card, are contrary to the Constitution. This study was designed to be qualitative for this purpose and uses normative methods of legal research. This study found that the decision of the Constitutional Court was not in line with Islamic Sharia and the Constitution of 1945 because it had an impact on the recognition of indigenous beliefs and their followers in order to have the same position in Indonesia as religions and their followers. This condition is damaging to society. According to the Islamic principle of sadd adz-dzarai, if it leads to something that is prohibited, something that is permitted must be closed or stopped. As respect to the Constitution of 1945, the provisions of Article 28E paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of the Constitution of 1945, where religions and indigenous beliefs are classified as two separate and distinct entities, are more relevant constitutional norms to be referred to.

Author(s):  
Gede Marhaendra Wija Atmaja ◽  
Nyoman Mas Aryani ◽  
Anak Agung Sri Utari ◽  
Ni Made Ari Yuliartini Griadhi

The purpose of this study is to find out the position of the Constitutional Court which later? an understanding of the politic of International agreement law adopted by the Republic of Indonesia. This can be reviewed from the legal considerations that underlying the Constitutional Court Decision. It is a legal research that examines the laws and regulation related to Constitutional Court through several stages: elaborate textual studies, completing textual studies, analyzing legal materials and determine conclusions. The study shows that International and legalized agreement that has not been ratified are placed as part of national law and are used as a reference to enrich the reasoning horizon in interpreting the constitution. Law on the ratification of the International Agreement containing norms which are attachments and an inseparable part of the law, which in its existence as a law constitutes the authority of the Constitutional Court to examine its constitutionality. In this context, the constitutional Court embraced the politic law of monism with the primate of national law and the Constitutional Court embraced the politic law of dualism when examining the constitutionality of the law concerning the ratification of the International Agreement-in terms of subject matter. Tujuan dari kajian ini adalah untuk mengetahui sikap Mahkamah Konstitusi yang nantinya akan memberikan pemahaman tentang politik hukum Perjanjian Internasional yang dianut Negara Republik Indonesia. Hal ini dapat ditinjau dari pertimbangan hukum yang mendasari amar Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Artikel ini merupakan suatu penelitian hukum yang mengkaji Peraturan Perundang-undangan dan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang ada dengan langkah-langkah melakukan studi tekstual, melengkapi studi tekstual serta melakukan analisis terhadap bahan hukum yang terkumpul dan menarik kesimpulan. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa Perjanjian Internasional yang telah disahkan maupun yang belum disahkan ditempatkan sebagai bagian dari hukum nasional dan dijadikan rujukan guna memperkaya cakrawala penalaran dalam menafsirkan Undang-Undang dasar. Undang-Undang tentang pengesahan Perjanjian internasional memuat norma yang merupakan lampiran dan bagian yang tidak terpisahkan dari Undang-Undang bersangkutan, yang dalam keberadaannya sebagai Undang-Undang merupakan kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi untuk menguji konstitusionalitasnya. Dalam konteks ini Mahkamah Konstitusi  menganut  politik hukum monisme dengan primat hukum nasional dan Mahkamah Konstitusi menganut politik  hukum dualisme saat menguji konstitusionalitas Undang-Undang tentang pengesahan Perjanjian Internasional dalam hal menyangkut pokok perkaranya.


Author(s):  
Dewa Nyoman Rai Asmara Putra ◽  
Sagung Putri M.E Purwani

Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris (UUJN) No 30 Tahun 2014, pengawasan notaris dilakukan oleh Menteri, dan kata pengawasan di dalamnya termasuk juga mengenai pembinaan. Untuk melaksanakan tugas dimaksud oleh menteri, dalam hal ini Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia dibentuk Majelis  Pengawas Notaris, yaitu suatu badan yang mempunyai kewenangan dan kewajiban untuk melakukan pengawasan dan pembinaan terhadap notaris. Pasal 66 ayat (1) UUJN menentukan: Untuk kepentingan proses peradilan, penyidik, penuntut umum, mengambil fotokopi minuta akta dan/atau surat-surat yang dilekatkan dalam minuta akta atau protokol notaris, serta pemanggilan notaris untuk hadir dalam  pemeriksaan berkaitan dengan akta yang dibuatnya, atau protokol notaris, dengan persetujuan MPD. Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam putusan nya Nomor 49/PUU-X/2012,  menyatakan frase “dengan persetujuan Majelis Pengawas Daerah” pada Pasal 66 UUJN, adalah bertentangan dengan UUD 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum. Permasalahan yuridis nya adalah: Apa saja wewenang MPD pasca putusan MK No. 49/PUU-X/2012 ? dan Bagaimana mekanisme pemeriksaan notaris oleh MPD? Dengan jenis penelitian hukum normatif permasalahan tersebut terjawab, bahwa Tugas dan wewenang  MPD pasca Putusan MK. No. 49/PUU-X/2012 hanya untuk melakukan pemeriksaan berkala dan/atau jika dipandang perlu, serta melakukan pemeriksaan notaris jika ada pengaduan dari masyarakat. Tugas dan kewenangan notaris sebagaimana Pasal 66 UUJN, berdasarkan No. 2 Tahun 2014 sebagai UU Perubahan atas UUJN dilakukan oleh Majelis Kehormatan Notaris. Mengenai mekanisme pemeriksaan Notaris harus dilakukan sesuai dengan UUJN Nomor 30 Tahun 2004, UU Per UUJN No 2 Tahun 2014, Peraturan Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia  Republik Indonesia Nomor M.02.PR.08.10 Tahun 2004 Tentang Tata Cara Pengangkatan Anggota, Pemberhentian Anggota, Susunan Organisasi, Tata Kerja, Dan Tata Cara Pemeriksaan Notaris; dan Keputusan Menteri  Hukum  Dan Hak Asasi Manusia  Republik Indonesia No. M.39-PW.07.10 Tahun 2004 Tentang  Pedoman Pelaksanaan Tugas Majelis Pengawas  Notaris. The Law on Position of Notary (UUJN) No 30 Year 2014, the supervision of a notary is conducted by the Minister, and the supervisory word in it also includes the guidance. To carry out the duties referred to by the minister, in this case the Minister of Justice and Human Rights established the Supervisory Board of Notary, which is an agency having the authority and obligation to conduct supervision and guidance on the notary. Article 66 Paragraph (1) UUJN determines: For the purposes of the judicial process, investigators, prosecutors, taking photocopies of minas deeds and / or letters embedded in minority deed or notary protocols, and notarial notes to be present in the examination relating to the deeds they make , Or notary protocol, with the approval of the MPD. The Constitutional Court in its decision No. 49 / PUU-X / 2012 states that the phrase "with the approval of the Regional Supervisory Board" in Article 66 UUJN, is contradictory to the 1945 Constitution and has no legal force. The juridical issue is: What are the powers of the MPD after the Constitutional Court's decision No. 49 / PUU-X / 2012? And What is the mechanism of notary examination by MPD? With this type of normative legal research the problem is answered, that the task and authority of the MPD after the Constitutional Court Decision. No. 49 / PUU-X / 2012 only to conduct periodic and / or deemed necessary inspections and to conduct a notary examination if there is a complaint from the public. Duties and authorities of a notary as referred to in Article 66 UUJN, based on No. 2 of 2014 as Law on Amendment of UUJN is conducted by the Honorary Board of Notary. Regarding the mechanism of inspection of a Notary must be done in accordance with UUJN Number 30 Year 2004, UU Per UUJN No 2 Year 2014, Regulation of the Minister of Justice and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia Number M.02.PR.08.10 Year 2004 About Procedures for Member Appointment, Dismissal of Members, Organizational Structure, Work Procedures, and Procedure of Notary Inspection; And Decree of the Minister of Justice and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia No. M.39-PW.07.10 of 2004 on Guidelines for the Implementation of Duties of the Notary Supervisory Board.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 79-88
Author(s):  
Aufa Naufal Rishanda

This study aims to describe the consistency of judges' considerations in the Constitutional Court Decision No. 14/PUU-XI/2013 and the Constitutional Court Decision No. 55/PUU-XVII/2019 and its suitability with the design of the election administration according to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. To measure the consistency of the two Constitutional Court Decisions, the meaning of the original intent of holding elections simultaneously according to the Amendment of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia will be used. This is normative legal research, which uses approach legislation (statute approach) and historical approach (historical approach). The results of this study indicate that the judge's considerations in the Constitutional Court Decision 14/PUU-XI/2013 are inconsistent with the Constitutional Court Decision 55/PUU-XVII/2019. Based on the original intent study, the Amendrs to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia disagreed on the simultaneous implementation of the General Election in Indonesia. So the judge's consideration in the Constitutional Court's decision Number 14/PUU-XI/2013, which requires simultaneous elections, is not following the design of the election administration according to the amendment to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Six alternatives for the simultaneous implementation of elections.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 44
Author(s):  
Orin Gusta Andini

 AbstrakSejak 2009 hingga saat ini terdapat 30 kasus yang diadili oleh Pengadilan Negeri di Indonesia dengan menggunakan Pasal 27 ayat (3) Undang-Undang Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik. Berbagai kasus tersebut memunculkan opini dari sebagian masyarakat yang menganggap pasal-pasal delik pencemaran nama baik bertentangan dengan semangat reformasi yang menjunjung kebebasan berpendapat dan berekspresi. Jenis penelitian ini adalah penelitian hukum normatif. Tulisan ini berkesimpulan bahwa tindak pidana reputasi pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 50/PUU-VI/2008, Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 2/PUU-VII/2009, Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 5/PUU-VIII/2010,  Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 31/PUU-XIII/2015 dan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 76/PUU-XV/2017 tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 diatur secara terperinci dengan salah satu pointnya yaitu melakukan perubahan dalam Pasal 27 ayat (3) UU ITE dan menurunkan ancaman pidana pada 2 (dua) ketentuan.Kata Kunci: Delik Reputasi, Kepastian Hukum dan Mahkamah Konstitusi.Abstract  Since 2009 until now there have been 30 cases tried by the District Courts in Indonesia using Article 27 paragraph (3) of Law Number 19 Year 2016 concerning Amendments to Law Number 11 Year 2008 concerning Information and Electronic Transactions. These various cases gave rise to opinions from some people who considered the articles of defamation offenses contrary to the spirit of reform which upheld the freedom of opinion and expression. This type of research is normative legal research. Normative legal research prioritizes library research with a focus on studies of legal principles, legal systematics, legal synchronization and legal history, this research is also descriptive. This study concluded that the crime of reputation after the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 50 / PUU-VI / 2008, Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 2 / PUU-VII / 2009, Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 5 / PUU-VIII / 2010, Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 31 / PUU-XIII / 2015 and Constitutional Court Decision Number 76 / PUU-XV / 2017 concerning Testing of Law Number 19 Year 2016 concerning Amendment to Law Number 11 Year 2008 concerning Information and Electronic Transactions of the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945 is regulated in detail with one of the points, namely making changes in Article 27 paragraph (3) of the ITE Law and reducing criminal threats in 2 (two) provisions.Keywords: Reputation Delik, Legal Certainty and the Constitutional Court.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 836
Author(s):  
M. Mahrus Ali ◽  
Alia Harumdani Widjaja ◽  
Meyrinda Rahmawaty Hilipito

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi seringkali menimbulkan perdebatan di masyarakat. Salah satunya terkait penundaan keberlakuan putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang telah melahirkan doktrin baru mengenai kekuatan hukum mengikatnya putusan MK. Penelitian ini mengangkat permasalahan, pertama: karakter putusan MK yang memuat tenggang waktu konstitusionalitas dan konsep kebersesuaian undang-undang dengan UUD 1945. Kedua, pengaruh putusan tersebut terhadap pembangunan hukum di Indonesia. Jenis penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian yuridis normatif. Hasil penelitian menyimpulkan bahwa, pertama, putusan-putusan yang menjadi objek penelitian ditemukan karakteristik yang beragam terkait dengan tenggang waktu konstitusionalitas dan kebersesuaian antara Undang-Undang dan Undang-Undang Dasar 1945, sebagai berikut; (i) Putusan yang menentukan tenggang waktu secara tegas dan perintah untuk penyesuaian dengan UUD 1945, yaitu putusan Nomor 012-016-019/PUU-IV/2006 (UU KPK) dan Putusan Nomor 32/PUU-XI/2013 (UU Asuransi) dan Putusan Nomor 026/PUU-III/2005 dan 026/PUU-IV/2006 (UU APBN); (ii) Putusan yang menentukan tenggang waktu secara tidak tegas (fleksibel) dan perintah untuk penyesuaian dengan UUD 1945, yaitu Putusan Nomor 97/PUU-XI/2013 (UU Pemda dan UU Kekuasaan Kehakiman) dan Putusan Nomor 14/PUU-XI/2013 (UU Pilpres); (iii) Putusan yang tidak menyebutkan tenggang waktu namun hanya perintah untuk penyesuaian dengan UUD 1945 (secara tidak langsung), yaitu Putusan Nomor 28/PUU-XI/2013 (UU Koperasi) dan Putusan Nomor 85/PUUXI/2013 (UU SDA). Kedua, Putusan MK menjadi salah satu faktor determinan dalam fungsi legislasi, dan hal ini dapat dipahami karena inilah bentuk diskresi yang dimiliki oleh MK selaku pelaku kekuasaan kehakiman.The constitutional court often make their headlines or controversy with their ruling. One of them is relative with the postpone enforcement of a decision which has raised a new doctrine about legal force's binding of the Constitutional Court's decision. This study raised the issue, first, about the character of the constitutional court's ruling which contained the limitation of time in constitutionality and the concept of conformity of the law with the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Second, the influence of the court decision on legal development in Indonesia. This study used normative legal research. The results of the study concluded that, first, it is founded that the various characteristics related to the limitation of time in constitutionality in the court's decision which become the object of this study and also it is founded that the compability between the law and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia as follows : (i) The court's decision that set the limited of time in constitutionality explicitly and orders to adjust to the 1945 Constitution of The Republic of Indonesia, namely decisions number 012-016-019/PUU-IV/2006 (Corruption Eradication Commission Act) and decision number 32/PUU-XI/2013 (Insurance Related Business Act) and decision number 026/PUU-III/2005 and 026/PUU-IV/2006 (State Budget Act); (ii) Court's decision that determine the limited of constitutionality flexibly and orders to adjust to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia namely decision number 97/PUU-XI/2013 (Regional Government Act and Judicial Power Act) and decision number 14/PUU-XI/2013 (Presidential Election Act); (iii) Court's decision that do not mention the limitation of time in constitutionality but only orders to adjust to the 1945 Constitution of The Republic of Indonesia, namely decision number 28/PUU-XI/2013 (Cooperatives Act) and decision number 85/PUU-XI/2013 (Water Resources Act). Secondly, the constitutional court decision is one of the determinant factors in the function of legislation, and this can be understood because this is the form of discretion that the constitutional court has as the perpetrator of judicial power.


2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 73
Author(s):  
Umbu Rauta ◽  
Ninon Melatyugra

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-78
Author(s):  
Agsel Awanisa ◽  
Yusdianto Yusdianto ◽  
Siti Khoiriah

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


Author(s):  
Dwi Sakti Muhamad Huda ◽  
Dodi Alaska Ahmad Syaiful ◽  
Desi Wahyuni

The Constitutional Court Decision Number 46 / PUU-VIII / 2010 annulled the provisions of Article 43 paragraph (1) of the Marriage Law because it contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and does not have binding legal force. The legal reason behind the rechtfinding is to emphasize that children born outside of marriage have the right to legal protection. This research was conducted with the aim of knowing the impact of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 46 / PUU-VIII / 2010 on one of the judges' judicial duties. This study uses a socio-legal approach with data collection techniques for study documents of literature materials. Based on the results of the analysis of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 46 / PUU-VIII / 2010, it does not contradict and intersect with the sociological discourse in accordance with the argumentum a contrario method. Then have coherence between the parental or bilateral kinship system with the Constitutional Court Decision No. 46 / PUU-VIII / 2010 in its application in Indonesia. This condition demands the intellectuality of Judges who are required to think on a broad scale and consider other disciplines in their legal findings.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Agnes Fitryantica

The Constitutional Court based on Article 24C of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia has 4 authorities and 1 obligation. These provisions are further contained in Article 10 of Law Number 24 Year 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court. The constitutional authority of the Constitutional Court in examining, adjudicating and deciding cases of judicial review of the constitution is about the constitutionality of norms. The method used is normative (doctrinal) legal research, using secondary data in the form of primary, tertiary and secondary legal materials. One of the legal materials used as the basis for analysis is the judge's decision and its implications for the judicial review. The results of the study that, the authority to test the Act against the 1945 Constitution theoretically or practically, makes the Constitutional Court as a controlling and balancing body in the administration of state power. The KPK is not the object of the Parlement questionnaire rights. The ruling emphasized that the KPK was an institution that could be the object of the questionnaire right by the Parlement. The implications of the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 36 / PUU-XV / 2017, can be grouped in two ways, namely: first, the implications are positively charged, namely the affirmation of the ownership of the House of Representatives questionnaire rights in Indonesian governance. Second, the negative implication is the possibility of using the DPR's excessive questionnaire rights without regard to existing limitations.Keywords : constitutional court; KPK; parlement.Mahkamah Konstitusi berdasarkan Pasal 24C UUD NRI Tahun 1945 memiliki 4 kewenangan dan 1 kewajiban. Ketentuan tersebut dituangkan lebih lanjut dalam Pasal 10 UU Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Kewenangan konstitusional Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam memeriksa, mengadili dan memutus perkara pengujian undang-undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar adalah mengenai konstitusionalitas norma. Metode yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif (doktrinal), dengan menggunakan data sekunder berupa bahan hukum primer, tersier dan sekunder. Salah satu bahan hukum yang dijadikan dasar analisis adalah putusan hakim dan implikasinya terhadap yudicial review. Hasil penelitian bahwa, kewenangan menguji Undang-Undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 secara teoritis atau praktis, menjadikan Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagai lembaga pengontrol dan penyeimbang dalam penyelenggaraan kekuasaan negara, Dalam Putusan Nomor 36/PUU-XV/2017, Mahkamah Konstitusi memutuskan menolak permohonan pemohon yang pada intinya menyebut KPK bukan merupakan objek hak angket DPR. Putusan tersebut menegaskan KPK merupakan lembaga yang dapat menjadi objek hak angket oleh DPR. Implikasi dari putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 36/PUU-XV/2017 tersebut, dapat dikelompokkan dalam dua hal, yaitu: pertama, implikasi yang bermuatan positif, yaitu penegasan dimilikinya hak angket Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat dalam ketatanegaran Indonesia. Kedua, Implikasi yang bermuatan negatif yaitu adanya kemungkinan penggunaan hak angket DPR yang eksesif tanpa memperhatikan batasan-batasan yang ada.Kata Kunci: DPR; KPK; Mahkamah Konstitusi.     


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-161
Author(s):  
Adeline Laureen Turangan ◽  
Agusmidah Agusmidah ◽  
Suria Ningsih

UU Ketengakerjaan No. 13 Tahun 2003 menetapkan bahwa dalam keadaan perusahaan dinyatakan pailit maka kedudukan upah pekerja/buruh tidak didahulukan sebelum kreditor separatis, pembayaran utang pajak, penggantian polis asuransi dan hak tanggungan. Hal ini dapat menghilangkan hak pekerja/buruh untuk memperoleh upah dan hakhak pasca hubungan kerja (pesangon, uang penghargaan masa kerja, penggantian hak). Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan. Hasil penelitian mengungkapkan bahwa setelah adanya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 67/PUU-XI/2013 upah pekerja atau buruh harus didahulukan. Sehingga harusnya apabila suatu perusahaan diputuskan pailit, maka perusahaan tersebut terlebih dahulu membayar hak upah pekerja atau buruhnya yang terutang, meski kedudukan hak-hak lain pekerja atau buruh masih berada di bawah tagihan hak upah dan kreditur separatis.   Major Labour Act No. 13 of 2003 stipulates that in the condition when a company is declared bankrupt then the position of wages for workers / laborers is not prioritized before the separatist creditors, payment of tax debt, replacement of insurance policies, and mortgage rights. This can eliminate the rights of workers / laborers to obtain wages and post-employment rights (severance pay, length of service pay, compensation). This study was a normative legal research with a statutory approach. The results of the study revealed that after the Constitutional Court Decision No. 67 / PUU-XI / 2013 the wages of workers or laborers must be prioritized. So that if a company is declared bankrupt, then the company should pay the wage rights of its workers or workers who are owed first, even though the position of other rights of workers or workers is still under the bill of wage rights and separatist creditors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document