scholarly journals Arrangement and Implementation of Notary Privileges after the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 49/PUQU-X/2012

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 152
Author(s):  
Marthalena Refningsih ◽  
Zainul Daulay ◽  
Jean Elvardi
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Supervisory Board ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Main Approach ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Research Problems ◽  
Approach Method ◽  
The Law

The formulation of the research problems includes: 1) How is the notary privilege arrangement before and after the decision of Constitutional Court number 49/PUU-X/2012? 2) How is the notary privilege implementation after the decision of Constitutional Court number 49/PUU-X/2012?The main approach method used in this research is a normative juridical approach; i.e. research that emphasizes legal aspects, by studying the primary and secondary legal materials which will later be used as guidelines in understanding and analyzing the issues under discussion. In addition, the main approach is supported by an empirical juridical approach.Discussion: 1) since the ratification of Law number 30 of 2004, notary privileges are regulated in Article 4, Article 16, Article 54 and Article 66 paragraph (1), following the decision of Constitutional Court number 49/PUU-X/2012 which grants the petition for judicial review of Article 66 paragraph (1). 2) After the establishment of the decision of Constitutional Court number 49/PUU-X/2012 related to the cancellation of the approval term of the Regional Supervisory Board in Article 66 paragraph (1) of the Law of Notary Position, there is no protection against privileges because investigators, public prosecutors and judges can call and take the copy of the original of the deed and documents in the storage directly without the approval of the Regional Supervisory Board.

scholarly journals Compensation for Land Procurement for the Construction of the Northern Ring Road of Solok City by the Regional Government of Solok

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 673
Author(s):  
Weri Zakia ◽  
Kurnia Warman ◽  
Frenadin Adegustara
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Government Agencies ◽  
Regional Government ◽  
Main Approach ◽  
Ring Road ◽  
The Public ◽  
Research Problems ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

This study aims to analyze compensation for land procurement for the construction of the northern ring road of Solok City by the Regional Government of Solok. The main approach method used is a research that emphasizes legal aspects by studying primary and secondary legal materials. It will later become a guideline for understanding and analyzing research problems. In addition, an empirical juridical approach is used as a support for the main approach. The results showed that the implementation of land procurement for the northern ring road of Solok City directly between Regional Government Agencies of Solok and landowners or their attorneys was carried out with the release of rights to land, buildings and objects associated with it under the principle of deliberation. It is in accordance with Article 10 of the Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 2 of 2012 jo. Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia No. 71 of 2012. Regarding the determination of compensation carried out by means of deliberations between Government Agencies through the Land Procurement Team and landowners and their attorneys, based on the appraisal team’s assessment results, the basis for the assessment is fair replacement value and/or proper and fair replacement. It is in accordance with Article 10 of the Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 2 of 2012 concerning Land Procurement for Development in the Public Interest and Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia No. 71 of 2012 concerning the Implementation of Land Procurement for Development in the Public Interest.

scholarly journals Judicial Consistency dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Penodaan Agama

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 080
Author(s):  
Zaka Firma Aditya
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Prevention Act ◽  
Ratio Decidendi ◽  
The Law ◽  
Prevention Law

Tulisan ini hendak membahas mengenai konsistensi putusan-putusan mahkamah konstitusi dalam pengujian undang-undang berdasarkan asas preseden. MK beberapa kali dipandang tidak konsisten karena kerap mengeluarkan putusan yang bersifat overrulling. Namun, sebenarnya tidak sedikit juga putusan MK yang konsisten mengikuti preseden. Meskipun penggunaan asas preseden hanya dikenal di negara yang menganut tradisi common law, MK ternyata juga menerapkannya. Putusan MK tentang pengujian UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama adalah salah satu bentuk dianutnya asas preseden di MK. Putusan ini secara konsisten menyatakan bahwa UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama tetap konstitusional karena akan terjadi kekosongan hukum apabila UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama diputus inkonstitusional. Dalam perkara tersebut, MK mempertahankan ratio decidendinya terhadap konstitusionalnya UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama karena meskipun MK sadar bahwa UU a quo banyak mengandung kelemahan. Konsistensi standing MK terhadap UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama ini merupakan salah satu bentuk dari dipraktekannya doktrin preseden.This paper will discuss the consistency of the constitutional court decision in the judicial review cases based on the principle of precedent. MK several times deemed inconsistent because often issued a ruling that is overruling. However, there were actually a lot of MK decisions that consistently followed the precedent. Although the use of the precedent principle is only known in common law tradition, the Constitutional Court apparently also applies it. The Constitutional Court’s decision regarding the Blasphemy Prevention Act was one form of the principle of precedent in the Constitutional Court. This decision consistently states that the Blasphemy Prevention Act remains constitutional because a legal vacuum will occur if the Blasphemy Prevention Law was decided to be unconstitutional. In this case, the Court retained its ratio decidendi to the constitutionality of the Blasphemy Prevention Law, even though the Court was aware that the Law contained many weaknesses. The consistency of the Constitutional Court on the judicial review of the Blasphemy Prevention Act is one form of the practice of precedent doctrine.

scholarly journals Mengukur Konstitusionalitas Peninjauan Kembali (PK) Kedua dalam Perkara Perdata

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 452-474
Author(s):  
Priyo Handoko
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Due Process Of Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Civil Cases ◽  
Constitutional Analysis

The study aims to provide a constitutional analysis of judicial review (PK) in civil cases for more than once. The research-based is the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 108 / PUU-XIV / 2016 and No. 34 / PUU-XI / 2013 in which the two judgments provide a different classification between criminal and civil cases. The method used in this research is a normative juridical with a conceptual, legislation, and case approach. The results of the study assert that: first, the opportunity for judicial review (PK) more than once in a criminal case is an effort to uphold justice substantively by the Constitutional Court. Whereas the restriction of judicial review (PK) only once in civil cases is intended to guarantee legal certainty. Secondly, there is rational inconsistency in the arguments of the Constitutional Court which is indicated in Decision No. 108 / PUU-XIV / 2016 and No. 34 / PUU-XI / 2013. Both criminal and civil cases must seek to establish and maintain substantial justice, especially since there is a due process of law principle that requires that everyone can get the same opportunity before the law.

scholarly journals Imunitas Hukum Bagi Notaris Yang Membuka Rahasia Jabatan

Jurnal Akta ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Rita Permanasari ◽  
Akhmad Khisni
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supervisory Board ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The Political ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Notary Public ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Law Regulation

ABSTRAKKetentuan Pasal 4 dan Pasal 16 ayat (1) huruf f Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris mewajibkan notaris untuk menjaga kerahasiaan segala sesuatu mengenai akta yang dibuatnya dan segala keterangan yang diperoleh guna pembuatan akta sesuai dengan sumpah janji jabatan kecuali undang-undang menentukan lain. Kemungkinan terhadap pelanggaran kewajiban tersebut berdasarkan Pasal 16 ayat (11) Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris, seorang notaris dapat dikenai sanksi berupa teguran lisan sampai dengan pemberhentian dengan tidak hormat. Terlebih lagi dengan adanya putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia dengan Nomor: 49/PUU–X/2012 memutuskan telah meniadakan atau mengakhiri kewenangan Majelis Pengawas Daerah (MPD) yang tercantum dalam Pasal 66 ayat (1) UUJN membuat notaris seakan-akan tidak ada perlindungan hukum bagi notaris dalam menjalankan tugas jabatannya. Ikatan Notaris Indonesia (INI) harus berusaha menjalankan peranan pembinaan dan perlindungan meningkatkan pengetahuan, kemampuan dan keterampilan para notaris. Demikian juga menjalin hubungan dengan para penegak hukum lainnya, agar penegak hukum lainnya yang ada hubungan dengan notaris dapat memahami kedudukan notaris sesuai UUJN.Berangkat dari pemikiran inilah kewajiban ingkar notaris masih tetap dipertahankan oleh pembuat undang-undang dalam revisi Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris Tahun 2014 yang merupakan konfigurasi kekuatan perlindungan terhadap profesi dan jabatan notaris dari sisi politik.Kata Kunci : Jabatan Notaris, Hak Ingkar, Perlindungan Hukum.ABSTRACTThe provisions of Article 4 and Article 16 paragraph (1) sub-paragraph f of the Notary's Office Law require a notary to maintain the confidentiality of all matters concerning the deeds it has made and all the information obtained for the deed in accordance with the oath of pledge of office except the law otherwise. The possibility of breach of such obligation under Article 16 paragraph (11) of Notary Law Regulation, a notary public may be subject to sanctions in the form of oral reprimands until dismissal with disrespect. Moreover, with the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia with the number : 49 /PUU-X/2012 deciding to have canceled or terminated the authority of the Regional Supervisory Board (MPD) listed in Article 66 paragraph (1) UUJN made a notary as if there was no legal protection for a notary in performing duties. The Indonesian Notary Bond (INI) should endeavor to undertake the role of guidance and protection to increase the knowledge, abilities and skills of the notaries. Likewise establish relationships with other law enforcers, so that other law enforcement who has relationship with the notary can understand the position of notary under the UUJN.Departing from this thought the obligation of notarization is still maintained by the lawmakers in the revision of the Law Regulation of Position Notary on Year 2014 which is the configuration of the strength of the protection of the profession and the notary's position from the political side.Keyword : Position of Notary, Right of Remedy, Legal Protection.

scholarly journals KEWENANGAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI REPUBLIK INDONESIA DALAM PEMBENTUKAN NORMA BARU (SUATU KAJIAN TERHADAP PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 21/PUU-XII/2014 JO PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 46/PUU-XIV/2016)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 474
Author(s):  
Elisabet . ◽  
Cut Memi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Legal Norm ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

One of the authorities of the Constitutional Court governed by the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945 was the examining of laws against the contitution or judicial review. Inside the regulations which governing the implementation of this authority, the Constitutional Court only acts as a negative legislator, namely canceling or reinforcing a norm tested by the Petitioner. But in practice, the Constitutional Court has changed its role to become a positive legislator, who is forming a new legal norm, which is the authority of legislators. The Constitutional Court should not be able to form a new legal norm because there is no legal basis which regulate that. But Constitutional Court can form a new legal norm in some urgent circumstances, relating to Human Rights, and preventing legal vacuum. In addition, the establishment of laws by lawmakers that require a long process and time. This is compelling Constitutional Court to make substitute norm before the law was established by the legislators. In the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 46/PUU-XVI/2016, the Court actually wants to establish a new legal norm, but because the articles in the petitioned have criminal sanctions, and if the Constitutional Court approves the petition, the Constitutional Court has formulated a new criminal act that can only be formed by the lawmaker. Whereas in the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 21/PUU-XII/2014, the Constitutional Court established a new norm because in the article a quo there were no criminal sanctions.

scholarly journals The Attempt to Human Rights Protection Through Judicial Review in Indonesia

2018 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 02006
Author(s):  
Riris Ardhanariswari ◽  
Muhammad Fauzan ◽  
Ahmad Komari
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
State Government ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Stable State ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
The Law ◽  
Law And Justice ◽  
Parliamentary Supremacy

The Constitutional Court is one of the perpetrators of judicial power, in addition to the Supreme Court as referred to in Article 24 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. The Constitutional Court is also bound to the general principle of an independent judicial power, free from the influence of other institutions in enforcing law and justice. The Constitutional Court is the first and last level judicial body, or it can be said that it is the only judicial body whose decisions are final and binding. The existence of the Constitutional Court is at the same time to maintain the implementation of a stable state government and is also a correction to the experience of constitutional life in the past caused by multiple interpretations of the constitution. Judicial review towards the constitution is one of the authorities of the Constitutional Court that attracted attention. This shows that there has also been a shift in the doctrine of the parliamentary supremacy towards the doctrine of the supremacy of the constitution. The law was previously inviolable, but now the existence of a law is questionable in its alignment with the Constitution. The authority to examine the Law towards the Constitution is the authority of the Constitutional Court as the guardian of the constitution. This authority is carried out to safeguard the provisions of the Act so that it does not conflict with the constitution and / or impair the constitutional rights of citizens. This shows that the judicial review towards the Constitution carried out by the Constitutional Court is basically also to provide protection for human rights.

scholarly journals Upaya Menciptakan Produk Hukum Berkualitas Konstitusi Melalui Model Preventif Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 774
Author(s):  
Muhammad Reza Maulana
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
The Law ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Constitutional Issue ◽  
Legal Product

Pada hakikatnya judicial review dilaksanakan demi terciptanya keseimbangan hukum dan terpenuhinya hak konstitusional setiap pemangku kepentingan untuk bertindak dan mengajukan permohonan pembatalan suatu undang-undang kepada Mahkamah Konstitusi dengan menyatakan undang-undang tersebut telah bertentangan dengan UUD RI 1945. Pengujian undang-undang terhadap UUD 1945 dilakukan dalam upaya penyempurnaan hukum yang berlandaskan konstitusi. Setiap undang-undang haruslah dilandasi oleh aturan dasar yang tidak hanya tercantum pada konsiderannya saja, melainkan dibuat serta dilaksanakan berlandaskan nilai dan norma konstitusionalitas. judicial review yang selama ini dilakukan oleh banyak pihak pada Mahkamah Konstitusi membuktikan bahwa kualitas produk hukum atau aturan hukum yang selama ini dilahirkan oleh pembuat undang-undang seringkali bertolak belakang dengan keteraturan hukum, sehingga diperlukan langkah hukum preventive demi menjaga integritas lembaga pembentuk undang-undang agar tidak dianggap melahirkan produk hukum yang asal-asalan. Oleh karena itu, di dalam penelitian ini akan mengkaji dan menginisiasi pembentukan produk hukum yang berkualitas konstitusi sehingga Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagai lembaga pengawal konstitusi memberikan kontribusi dengan cita konstitusi dan melahirkan produk hukum dengan kualitas konstitusi. Dalam penelitian ini metode yang yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang dan konseptual. Hasil penelitian ini menggambarkan betapa pentingnya upaya preventive sebelum suatu aturan hukum kemudian ditetapkan, disahkan dan dilaksanakan, dimana ada persoalan konstitusionalitas terhadap implementasi suatu produk hukum yang kemudian oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dinyatakan bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945.Basically, judicial review has done to create a balance of law and to fulfill the constitutional right for every stakeholder to act and apply for application to constitutional court by stating the rule was contradicted to the constitution of Republic of Indonesia 1945. The application was made as an effort to perfect the law which is based on the constitution. Each rule has to be based on the basic rules, not only on its consideration but also is made and implemented in basic values and norms of contitutionality. Judicial review done by many people on constitutional court has proven that the quality of law product or rules of law made by the legislative often contradict with constitutional order of law, so it is necessary to take a step on preventive legal measurer to keep up the integrity of the rule maker of being judged making unqualified legal products. Therefore, this research reviews and initiates the production of law product so that the Constitutional Court can give preventive contribution on each legal products made, to be able to run with the ideals of the constitution and create legal products with constitution quality. This research used juridical normative method with legal and conceptual approaches. The results of this study illustrate how important preventive efforts before a rule of law are then set, ratified and implemented. In which there is a constitutional issue on the implementation of a legal product, that will be later declared by the Constitutional Court to be contradictory to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesian.

scholarly journals Legal Examination of the Constitutional Court Number 28/PUU-XI/2013 Concerning the Case of Judicial Review of Law Number 17 of 2012 Concerning Cooperatives

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 42
Author(s):  
Lauddin Marsuni ◽  
Salle Salle ◽  
Syarifuddin Syarifuddin ◽  
La Ode Husen
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Technical Analysis ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Normative Approach ◽  
Natural Person ◽  
Analysis Methods ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Force

This study aims to understand the legal review on Decision of the Constitutional Court No. 28/PUU-XI/2013 on the review of Law No. 17 of 2012 on Cooperatives against The 1945 Constitution. The benefits of this research are socialization and provide legal awareness about cooperatives activities in Indonesia. This research uses a normative approach that focuses on studying the legal and regulatory norms associated with the object of the problem. The technical analysis used in this study is the Hermeneutic and Interpretation analysis methods. The results of the study indicate that Phrase “natural person” in the cooperatives sense was based on Article 1 point 1 of Law No. 17 of 2012 is against Article 33 section (1) of The 1945 Constitution because that definition leads to individualism. Furthermore, although the Petitioner's petition is only regarding certain articles it contains substantial norm content, it will cause other articles in Law No. 17 of 2012 has no binding legal force. Therefore the Petitioner's petition must be declared in accordance with the law for all contents of Law No. 17 of 2012. As for the sake of legal certainty, Law No. 25 of 1992 valid for a while awaiting the establishment of a new Law.

scholarly journals Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 85/PUU-XIV/2016 terhadap Praktek Persekongkolan Tender

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 369
Author(s):  
Titis Anindyajati
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
The Law

Pada pokoknya, persekongkolan tender merupakan salah satu bentuk persekongkolan yang dilarang UU Nomor 5/1999 tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat dan juga menjadi perkara yang paling sering diproses KPPU. Namun baik secara teoritis maupun praktik menimbulkan permasalahan yaitu karena adanya pemaknaan yang bias akan frasa “pihak lain” dalam Pasal 22 UU Nomor 5/1999. Hal inilah yang melatarbelakangi adanya pengujian Pasal 22 ke MK. Dalam penulisan ini yang dibahas yaitu bagaimana pengaturan persekongkolan tender menurut peraturan perundang-undangan, bagaimanakah implikasi yuridis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 85/PUU-XIV/2016 tentang pengujian Pasal 22 UU Nomor 5/1999 serta bagaimana analisis hukum terhadap pertimbangan hukum Putusan MK tersebut. Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian yuridis normatif dimana obyek penelitian ini adalah peraturan perundang-undangan dan Putusan MK. Dalam hal ini Penulis menyimpulkan, yaitu, Pertama, persekongkolan tender yang merupakan suatu bentuk kerja sama antara dua pihak atau lebih untuk menguasai pasar yang bersangkutan dan/atau memenangkan peserta tender yang mengakibatkan terjadinya persaingan usaha tidak sehat diatur secara eksplisit dalam Pasal 1 angka 8 dan Pasal 22 UU Nomor 5/1999 serta Peraturan KPPU Nomor 2/2010, Kedua, Implikasi yuridis Putusan MK Nomor 85/PUU-XIV/2016 bermanfaat untuk menjamin kepastian hukum dan keadilan bagi para pihak seperti pengusaha utamanya masyarakat. Untuk itu, perlu adanya harmonisasi antara satu peraturan dengan peraturan lainnya, pengujian UU terhadap UUD terkait pengaturan persekongkolan tender dalam persaingan usaha tidak sehat ataupun revisi terhadap UU Nomor 5/1999.Principally, tender conspiracy is one form of conspiracy that subjected by the Law No. 5/1999 on The Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition, and also as a type of case that frequently occurred and processed by the KPPU. However, in theory, and in practice, there are some issues that plague the regulation, because of the occurrence of bias and unclear interpretation of the phrases “other parties” contained in Article 22 of Law 5/1999. This interpretation issue then became the background in the petition for review of Article 22 to the Constitutional Court. This paper mainly discussed the regulation of tender conspiracy according to the existing Law, and also to study the juridical implications of Constitutional Court Decision Number 85/PUU-XIV/2016 concerning the review of Article 22 Law 5/1999. This paper also delves into the legal analysis of the court considered in the aforementioned Decision. This paper utilized the means of normative juridical research methodology, with the existing regulations and Constitutional Court Decision as the object of research. In the paper, the writer concludes that, first, tender conspiracy is a form of cooperation between one party or more to control particular market and/or to determine the awardees of tenders which may cause unfair business competition explicitly regulated in Article 1 number 8 and Article 22 Law 5/1999 and also the KPPU Regulation Number 2/2010, second, the juridical implications of Constitutional Court Decision Number 85/PUU-XIV/2016 was necessary in order to guarantee the equitable legal certainty and fairness toward all parties especially business practising citizens. Thus, there is a necessity to achieve harmony among these regulations, which can be obtained through the judicial review of laws against the Constitution concerning the regulations of tender conspiracy and by means of legislative revision toward Law 5/1999.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document