scholarly journals Examine The Constitutionality Of Regulations Under Laws That Are Not Contrary To The Law But Contrary To The Constitution

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-113
Author(s):  
Aditya Yuli Sulistyawan ◽  
I Putu Eka Cakra

Kewenangan untuk memeriksa UU terhadap Konstitusi dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dan pengujian hukum dan peraturan berdasarkan Undang-Undang tentang Hukum dilaksanakan oleh Mahkamah Agung sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 24 A paragraf 1 dan 24 C paragraf 1 Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. Namun, dalam perumusan pasal a quo ternyata masih menyisakan masalah, yaitu belum mengatur mekanisme pengujian norma yang terkandung dalam undang-undang di bawah undang-undang jika ternyata tidak bertentangan dengan undang-undang tetapi bertentangan dengan konstitusi. Tulisan ini membahas pengujian norma-norma undang-undang melalui Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 tentang kewenangan peradilan di casu a quo pasal 24 A ayat 1 dan 24 C ayat 1 Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. Kata kunci: otoritas, hukum, konstitusi. Abstract The authority to examine the Law against the Constitution is carried out by the Constitutional Court and the testing of the laws and regulations under the Law on the Law is carried out by the Supreme Court as regulated in article 24 A paragraph 1 and 24 C paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. However, in the formulation of the article a quo it turns out still leaves a problem, namely not yet regulating the norm testing mechanism contained in the legislation under the legislation if it turns out it is not contrary to the law but contrary to the constitution. This paper analyzes the testing of the norms of the legislation through the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Republic IX concerning judicial authority in casu a quo article 24 A paragraph 1 and 24 C paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Keyword: authority, law, the constitution.

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Marwan Hsb

Article 24C Section (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia authorizes the Constitutional Court to reviewthe law against the constitution. However, when referring to the hierarchy of legislation, the law has the equal hierarchy with government regulation in lieu of law. It makes a question whether the Constitutional Court truly has the authority to review government regulation in lieu of law against the constitution? Based on the research in this paper, it was found that by the Constitutional Court Decision Number 138/PUU-VII/2009, the Constitutional Court stated that the authority to review government regulation in lieu of law under the authority of the Constitutional Court because the substance of government regulation in lieu of law is similar with the substance of law. So, the Constitutional Court has the authority to review a government regulation in lieu of law materially. Such decision is correct; the Constitutional Court has the authority to review a government regulation in lieu of law in material because the substance is similar with the law. While formally reviewing should be the authority of the Supreme Court due to government regulation in lieu of law formally is in the form of government regulation


2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Fauzan

The relationship between the Supreme Court by the Judicial Commission in the Republic of Indonesia system is not harmonious, this is due to the first, the disharmony between the law on judicial power, including the law on Judicial Power, the law on the Supreme Court, the law on Constitutional Court and the law on the Judicial Commission. Both of the leadership character that exist in the Supreme Court and the Judicial Commission were too emphasizes in ego that one sector feel more superior than the others. To create a harmonious relationship between Supreme Court and Judicial Commission can be done by establishing intensive communication between both of them and by improvement in legislation. Keywords : relation, Supreme Court, Judicial Commission   


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-95
Author(s):  
Krisnadi Nasution

Post the amendment of the Republic of Indonesia constitution, judicial authority in Indonesia underwent a fundamental change. The amendment was made based on the mandate contained in the 1945 Constitution post the amendment. Through normative juridical studies, an analysis of these changes will be carried out. The method of approach is based on statutory regulations and conceptually, as well as comprehensive. Post the amendment of the Republic of  Indonesia Constitution, in the beginning, only the Supreme Court had power in the field of justice. Then developed with the formation of new institutions in the field of justice namely: the Constitutional Court and the Judicial Commission. Through these additions, it is expected that checks and balances will occur in the formation of laws and regulations and the implementation of judicial power.


FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
La Ode Angga La Ode Angga

The Harmonization of the Authority between Supreme Court (MA) institutions The Constitutional Court (MK) and Judicial Commission (KY) is a must. It is done by way of revision of the Law of the Supreme Court, MK and KY for the harmonization of authority. However, if the revision finds a dead end, then the fifth amendment (5) of the 1945 Constitution of the State of the Republic of Indonesia (UUDNRI 1945) is limited to be reconstructed by the provision of Article 24B paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution by affirming the authority of KY clear so that it is not considered to interfere with judicial power. The harmonization can be done by adding an institution that oversees the authority of the Constitutional Court by performing reconstruction in Article 24B paragraph (1) so that there is no more tendency of absolute power. The supervised judge is a judge of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court.  Keywords: Harmonization, Authority, Supreme Court, Constitutional Court, Judicial Commission.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-57
Author(s):  
Azwad Rachmat Hambali

Tujuan penelitian menganalisis kemerdekaan hakim dan kemandirian kehakiman dalam konsep negara hukum. Metode Penelitian menggunakan penelitian hukum normative, Hasil penelitian bahwa Kemerdekaan Hakim  dan kemandirian Kekuasaan Kehakiman sebagai  penjelmaan konsep Negara Hukum sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 1 ayat 3 Undang Undang Dasar Negara Republik indonesia Tahun 1945  (hasil amandemen) beserta beberapa peraturan perundang undangan yang terkait seperti Undang Undang Kekuasaan Kehakiman, Undang Undang Mahkamah Agung, Undang Undang Komisi Yudisial  serta ketetapan MPR yang merupakan rujukan dalam pelaksanan Kemerdekaan Hakim, dan kemandirian personal, kemandirian substantive ,kemandirian internal serta kemandirian institusi. Rekomendasi mewujudkan konsep Negara Hukum perlu ditata peraturan perundang undangan yang menjamin kemerdekaan Hakim dan Kemandirian Kekuasaan. The research objective is to analyze the independence of judges and the independence of the judiciary in the concept of a rule of law. The research method uses normative legal research. The results show that the independence of judges and the independence of the judicial power as the embodiment of the concept of the rule of law as regulated in Article 1 paragraph 3 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (amendments) along with several related laws and regulations such as the Law Judicial Power, the Law on the Supreme Court, the Judicial Commission Law and the MPR decrees which are references in the implementation of Judges' Independence, and personal independence, substantive independence, internal independence and institutional independence. Recommendations to embody the concept of a rule of law need to put in place laws and regulations that guarantee the independence of judges and independence of power.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 364
Author(s):  
Yanzah Bagas Nugraha ◽  
Dwi Andayani Budisetyowati

The establishment of the Regional Representative Council of the Republic of Indonesia so called Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPD-RI) at least has two objectives. The first is to enhance justice for the people in the region. Secondly, to expanding and increasing the participation of local communities in national life. The process to form this state institution is done by amending the 3rd amendment of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic Indonesia. However, in doing that  amendment there was an internal conflict within the body of DPD-RI involving the old and the new leaders of this institution last year. The length of leadership tenure which was initially made 5 years was amended to became 2.5 years. The different length of leadership tenure was then canceled by the Supreme Court and it was decided to be the same as other institution such as The People’s Consultative Assembly and The House of Representative in that the leadership tenure should be in accordance with the electoral cycle of 5 years. However, although the regulation of DPD-RI has been canceled, the Supreme Court keeps sending its representative to guide the oath of position of the new DPD-RI leadership. The only regulation that has been introduced by the state was regulation toward conflict between state institutions and this conflict can merely be resolved by the Constitutional Court. Therefore, there is an urgent need for the state to seek solution to solve this problem to prevent the same thing happened to other state institution in the future.


2021 ◽  
pp. 62-77
Author(s):  
L. L. Kofanov ◽  

The paper deals with the Roman senatus in the period from 5th to 3rd century BC, from the point of view of its composition, completion and selected competences. As to its composition, in the most arcaic times of the Roman state, the senate was an assembly of the heads of clans (patres gentium), who represented the ideas of patricians. The autor presents gradual transformation of the composition of the senate and switch towards the inclusion of the plebeians. It describes also the process of the cooptation of the members, rules of which incurred fundamental changes from the hereditary principles to the regulation given by statutes. A significant part of the article is devoted to the judicial functions of the Senate and the relationship between the iudicium senatus and the iudicium populi, the transformation of the Senate court from a regional body to the highest, global court of the entire Mediterranean. It’s noted that if the original Roman Senate de iure was the judicial authority only one of the Latin Confederation, later after 338 BC, it becomes the Supreme court of the Latin Union, and by the end of the Republic is transformed into the «Supreme Council of the world».


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document