scholarly journals CELAH INTERVENSI KEKUASAAN EKSEKUTIF TERHADAP KEKUASAAN YUDIKATIF DI LINGKUNGAN PERADILAN MILITER

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-216
Author(s):  
Aditya Wiguna Sanjaya
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Reform Era ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Military

Judicial power is one of the pillars supporting the establishment of a state, which ideally upholds the principle of independence so that it is independent and free from any influence of power, in the context of Indonesia the judicial power is carried out by a Supreme Court consisting of four judicial circles, namely general justice, religious court, the administrative court, military court and a Constitutional Court, in the course of the dynamics in the implementation of Judicial Power in Indonesia, which initially involved the organization, administration, and finance of the judicial body in relation to subordinate executive power, after the reform era had shifted under the Supreme Court, however, specifically for the military court there are still gaps in the potential for intervention from the executive power, which are caused by judges in the military court hierarchically there is still a command relationship with the TNI Commander and the President as the highest authority over the TNI. This will certainly have an influence on the independence of the military court as one of the executive branches of judicial power.

scholarly journals KEWENANGAN BADAN PENGAWAS PEMILU DALAM PENANGANAN PELANGGARAN ADMINISTRASI DITINJAU DARI PERSPEKTIF SISTEM PERADILAN INDONESIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-85
Author(s):  
Alasman Mpesau
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Supervisory Board ◽  
Electoral System ◽  
General Election ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Religious Courts

In the General Election and Regional Head Election Law, the Election Supervisory Board (Bawaslu) has the authority supervisory to each Election stages, it is the center for law enforcement activities of the Election (Sentra Gakkumdu) to criminal acts and carrying out the judicial functions for investigating, examining, and decided on administrative disputes of General Election and Regional Head Election.  With the Bawaslu’s authority then placed as a super-body institution in the ranks of the Election Management Body, due to its essential role in building a clean and credible electoral system, it also has potential for abuse of power within it. In Law no. 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power has defined state institutions that have the authority to administrate judicial functions. These are the Supreme Court and Judicial Bodies that under its lines of general court, Religious Courts, Military Courts, Administrative Court (PTUN) and the Constitutional Court. The research method is normative juridical, that focuses on the analysis of the laws and regulations on General Election, Regional Head Elections and the Law on Judicial Power. The analytical tool is descriptive analysis, by describing the main issues, an analysis is carried out that was supported by case-approach related to the research. The study concludes that Bawaslu in carrying out judicial functions in its position as a semi-judicial institution has not a hierarchical relationship to the Supreme Court (MA) and the Constitutional Court (MK); however, what does exist is functional relationship.

scholarly journals Menakar Independensi Hakim Pengadilan Pajak Pasca Putusan MK Nomor 10/PUU-XVIII/2020

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 879
Author(s):  
Ananthia Ayu Devitasari
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Power ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Theory Approach ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Deputy Chairman ◽  
Ministry Of Finance ◽  
Tax Court ◽  
Article 5 ◽  
Case Number

AbstrakIndependensi peradilan adalah fondasi utama terwujudnya keadilan dan kepastian hukum. Terkait diskursus independensi kekuasaan kehakiman tersebut, Mahkamah Konstitusi memutus Perkara Nomor 10/PUU-XVIII/2020 yang menguji pasal Pasal 5 ayat (2) dan Pasal 8 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 2002 tentang Pengadilan Pajak. Para Pemohon menguji kewenangan pembinaan organisasi, administrasi, dan keuangan bagi Pengadilan Pajak dilakukan oleh Departemen Keuangan, kewenangan Menteri Keuangan untuk mengusulkan ketua dan wakil Ketua Pengadilan Pajak, serta ketiadaan batasan periodesasi jabatan ketua dan wakil ketua. Lebih lanjut, Mahkamah dalam amar putusan a quo menyatakan bahwa ““Ketua dan Wakil Ketua diangkat oleh Presiden yang dipilih dari dan oleh para Hakim yang selanjutnya diusulkan melalui Menteri dengan persetujuan Ketua Mahkamah Agung untuk 1 (satu) kali masa jabatan selama 5 (lima) tahun”. Berangkat dari latar belakang tersebut, kajian ini berusaha menganalisa independensi hakim pengadilan pajak pasca Putusan MK Nomor 10/PUU-XVIII/2020 dengan pendekatan teori independensi peradilan. Kajian ini menunjukkan Putusan Mahkamah tidak hanya mendukung independensi hakim badan peradilan pajak tetapi juga menarik garis demarkasi antara kekuasaan kehakiman dengan kekuasaan eksekutif.AbstractJudicial independence is the main foundation for the of justice and legal certainty. Regarding the discourse on the independence of judicial power, the Constitutional Court decided on Case Number 10 / PUU-XVIII / 2020 which examined Article 5 paragraph (2) and Article 8 paragraph (2) of Law Number 14 of 2002 concerning the Tax Court. The Petitioners challenged the authority of Ministry of Finance to develop the organization, administration and finance for the Tax Court, the authority of the Minister of Finance to propose the chairperson and deputy chairman of the Tax Court. Furthermore, the Court in its ruling states that "the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson are appointed by the President who is elected from and by the Judges who are subsequently proposed through the Minister with the approval of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for 1 (one) term of office for 5 (five) years". This study examined the independence of the tax court judges after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 10 / PUU-XVIII / 2020 with independent judicial theory approach. This study showed that the Court's decision not only supports the independence of the tax court judges but also draws a demarcation line between judicial power and executive power. 

scholarly journals Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Terhadap Pembubaran Partai Politik Di Indonesia

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-239
Author(s):  
Hasir Budiman Ritonga
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Party Members ◽  
The Republic

Judicial power in Indonesia under the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia shall be exercised by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. One of the authority of the Constitutional Court according to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia is to decide the dissolution of political parties. The facts in the current Indonesian system of ketatanegaran no cases of political parties that were dissolved through the decision of the Constitutional Court, it's just that the problem is when the Constitutional Court uses its authority to break the dissolution of political parties there are things that are formal juridically there is no clear rules, such as the legal status of party members who are not directly involved in the violation committed by the party and the status of party members who hold the position of members of the legislature both at the center and in the regions. So for that must be resolved by emphasizing the certainty, justice and benefit in the decision of the constitutional court

scholarly journals Penerapan Asas Audi Alteram Et Partem Pada Perkara Judicial review Di Mahkamah Agung

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Asep Syarifuddin Hidayat
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
Trial Process ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Impact

Abstract.Article 13 paragraph 1 of Act Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power states that all court hearings are open to the public, unless the Act says otherwise. Therefore, a judicial review trial must be open to the public. If the trial process of the judicial review is carried out in a closed manner, it can be considered a legal defect, because it is contrary to Article 13 paragraph (3) of the Law. The Law of the Supreme Court is not regulated that the judicial review is closed, because in the judicial review there is a need for openness or principle of audiences of parties or litigants must be given the opportunity to provide information and express their opinions, including the defendant as the maker of Legislation invitation under the law, so that the impact of the decision will need to be involved.Keywords: Judicial Review, Audi Alteram Et Partem Principle, Supreme Court, Constitutional Court Abstrak.Pasal 13 ayat 1 Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman menyebutkan semua sidang pemeriksaan pengadilan terbuka untuk umum, kecuali Undang-Undang berkata lain. Oleh karena itu,  judicial review persidangan harus dilakukan terbuka untuk umum. Apabila proses persidangan judicial review ini dilakukan secara tertutup, maka dapat dinilai cacat hukum karena bertentangan dengan Pasal 13 ayat (3) Undang-Undang tersebut. Undang-Undang Mahkamah Agung pun tidak diatur bahwa persidangan judicial review bersifat tertutup, karena dalam judicial review perlu adanya keterbukaan atau asas audi alteram et partem atau pihak-pihak yang berperkara harus diberi kesempatan untuk memberikan keterangan dan menyampaikan pendapatnya termasuk pihak termohon sebagai  pembuat Peraturan Perundang-Undangan di bawah Undang-Undang sehingga akan terkena dampak putusan perlu dilibatkan.Kata Kunci: Judicial Review, Asas Audi Alteram Et Partem, Mahkamah Agung, Mahkamah Konstitusi.

scholarly journals Judicial Law-making and Its Regulation in Independent Ukraine: Its History and Development

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 82-100
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
History Of ◽  
Law Making

The article studies the history of the origin and development of legal regulation of judicial law-making in Ukraine. The analysis of doctrinal ideas about judicial law- making, as well as the peculiarities of its formation in Ukraine, allowed us to emphasise that our scientific research is relevant because of: 1) the duration of the domestic judicial system and judicial reform, which dates back to the proclamation of Ukraine’s independence (1991) and continues to this day; 2) the ambiguity of the legal support for judicial law-making in Ukraine, the high level of its variability, and the uncertainty of the legal status of the subjects of judicial power in the mechanism of domestic law-making; 3) the doctrinal uncertainty of the place of judicial law-making in the domestic legal system, the ambiguity of its scientific perception, and the understanding of its function in the domestic mechanism of legal regulation. This paper analyses the provisions of the legislation of Ukraine in terms of legal support for forms and procedures of judicial law-making, the legal significance of judicial law-making acts, and their impact on administering justice in Ukraine. Particular attention is paid to the activities of the judiciary in the areas of law enforcement and law-making, the relationship and interaction of which requires strengthening in the current context of reforming the judicial system and the judiciary in Ukraine. The stages of development of the legal regulation of judicial law-making in Ukraine are revealed, the peculiarities of the legal support for judicial law-making are determined, and the content of the legal regulation of the mechanism of participation of the subjects of the judicial power of Ukraine in the national law-making is characterised. Analysis of the history of the legal regulation of judicial law-making in Ukraine and the current state of its legal provision allowed us to conclude that despite the scale of legislative changes in the legal support for the judicial system of Ukraine today, neither the Supreme Court, nor the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, nor any other court institution is recognised by the legislation of Ukraine as subjects of law-making. The legislation of Ukraine does not contain a clear definition of their status as the subject of law-making with the right to accept generally obligatory acts of this process. It is noted that such uncertainty significantly weakens both the legal support for the courts and their activities. At the same time, it is noted that as a result of the adoption of legislative acts within the judicial reform during 2014-2017, which are still in force today, the legislator has made a significant step towards recognising and consolidating the official status of judicial law-making, namely: 1) a number of legislative powers of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court of Ukraine were consolidated; 2) the legislative regulation of the stages of the law-making process by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court of Ukraine has been strengthened; 3) the legal consolidation of the status of law-making acts of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court of Ukraine has been improved.

scholarly journals Political Law Regulation of Judicial Institutions in Exercising the Powers of an Independent Judgment: Before and After Amendments to the 1945 Constitution

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-128
Author(s):  
Salahudin Pakaya
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Power Law ◽  
John Locke ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
New Order ◽  
Old Order ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Before And After

The Supreme Court is a judicial institution that has existed since the Indonesian state was formed in 1945. This institution was formed based on the mandate of the constitution in article 24 of the 1945 Constitution, namely "judicial power is exercised by a Supreme Court and other judicial bodies according to law". But in fact, in the course of Indonesia's national and state life from its independence in 1945 to 1998, the judicial power exercised by the Supreme Court was not free and independent, both institutionally and independently of its judges. The influence of the executive power held by the president on the judicial power exercised by the Supreme Court can actually be observed in the politics of regulating judicial power through laws by the executive and legislative bodies during the old order government (President Soakarno 1945-1966) and the new order (President Soeharto 1967-1998). The judicial power law that was formed has actually subordinated the judiciary under the power of the president. This is the result of efforts to form the state of Indonesia as a country based on kinship that does not adhere to a separation of powers (executive, legislative and judicial) as the trias politica concept put forward by John Locke and Montesquie. With the 1998 reforms which in turn succeeded in amending the 1945 Constitution in order to realize the Indonesian state as a democratic legal state, the judiciary has been strengthened as an institution that is truly free and independent from the influence of extra-judicial powers.

scholarly journals PASANG SURUT HUBUNGAN ANTARA MAHKAMAH AGUNG DENGAN KOMISI YUDISIAL DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN REPUBLIK INDONESIA

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Fauzan
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Relationship

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   

scholarly journals INDEPENDENSI SISTEM PERADILAN MILITER DI INDONESIA (Studi Tentang Struktur Peradilan Militer) / THE INDEPENDENCY OF MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE INDONESIAN (The Study of The Structure of The Judiciary)

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Slamet Sarwo Edy
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The Body ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
District Court ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Military Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Military

Peradilan militer adalah badan yang melaksanakan kekuasaan kehakiman di lingkungan TNI untuk menegakan hukum dan keadilan. Pengadilan militer tidak berpuncak dan tidak diawasi oleh markas besar TNI, tetapi berpuncak dan diawasi oleh MA RI. Filosofi terjadinya ketidakmandirian dalam sistem peradilan militer pertama, karena faktor kepentingan militer (TNI) yaitu berkaitan dengan tugas pokok TNI mempertahankan kedaulatan negara, oleh karena itu dengan menempatkan peran komandan satuan (Ankum) maupun lembaga kepaperaan didalam sistem penegakan hukum tersebut. Kedua, pada awal pembentukan organisasi peradilan militer menempatkan aparat peradilan sipil sebagai penjabat pada pengadilan militer. Ketua pengadilan negeri yang ditunjuk sebagai tempat kedudukan pengadilan tentara karena jabatannya menjadi ketua pengadilan tentara. Panitera pengadilan negeri juga menjabat sebagai panitera pengadilan tentara, kepala kejaksaan negeri ditetapkan sebagai jaksa tentara. Keadaan demikian menimbulkan keberatan-keberatan dengan alasan dipandang akan tidak menguntungkan bagi militer ataupun kesatuan militer. Peradilan militer ke depan harus mandiri baik secara kelembagaan maupun secara fungsional. Dalam konteks itu maka penyidik adalah polisi militer yang terdiri AD, AL dan AU, bertanggung jawab kepada Danpuspom TNI. Penuntutan dan pelimpahan perkara ke pengadilan dilaksanakan oleh oditur militer yang bertanggung jawab kepada Orjen TNI. Kewenangan pengadilan tidak lagi didasarkan kepada kepangkatan terdakwa. Pembinaan organisasi, administrasi, dan finansial pengadilan militer sepenuhnya berada dibawah MARI sebagaimana diatur dalam undang-undang.Military Court is the body that conduct the judicial power in the Indonesian Military Force (TNI) scope to enforce law and justice. The Military Court does not culminate and not supervised by the Indonesian Military Force headquarters, but culminates and is supervised by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The Philosophy of  the occurrence of dependence in the first military justice system, because of the interest of the military (TNI) which is associated with its principal task of TNI is to defend the national sovereignty, for that reason, by putting the role of commander of the unit (Ankum) as well as kepaperaan within the law enforcement system. The Head of the district court also covers Military Court in his jurisdiction because of it the Head of district court becomes the Head of Military Court. The Registrar is automatically also the Registrar of Military Court, Head of State Prosecutors assigned as military prosecutor. These circumstances affect objections which are seen as unfavorable for military or military units. The authority of the Court is no longer based on the rank of the defendant, the hierarchy of court proceedings such as judges, military Prosecutors, defense attorneys, no longer use the rank but wearing a toga. Development of organizational, administrative, financial of Military Courts is fully under the Supreme Court held consequently as stipulated in the law of judicial power.  The execution of criminal act by military prison, executed equally as prisoner without discriminating the person by his rank. 

scholarly journals THE COMPARISON BETWEEN THE JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA AND THE NETHERLANDS COUNCIL FOR THE JUDICIARY

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 40
Author(s):  
Suparto Suparto
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Personnel Administration

The purpose of this study is to analyze the position and authority of the Judicial Commission of the Republic of Indonesia and its comparison to the Netherlands Council for the Judiciary. This comparative study applied a normative juridical method. The data used in this study were secondary data. The collected data were then analyzed qualitatively. The results showed that Judicial Commission has an important position in judicial system in Indonesia so as structurally, its position is aligned with the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Yet, functionally, its role is auxiliary to the judicial power institutions. Although the function of the Judicial Commission is related to judicial power, but the Judicial Commission is not an agent of judicial power, rather, it is an agency enforcing code of ethics of judges. Besides, the Judicial Commission is also not involved in the organization, personnel, administration and financial matters of judges. This condition is different from the Judicial Commission in European countries, such as the Netherlands. The Judicial Commission in the Netherlands (The Netherlands Council for the Judiciary) has an authority in the area of technical policy and policy making in the field of justice. The Netherlands Council for the Judiciary and other Judicial Commission in European countries generally have the authority in managing organization, budget and administration as well as in conducting promotions, transfers, and recruitments as well as imposing sanctions on judges. Thus, the Supreme Court only focuses on carrying out judicial functions and does not deal with administrative and judicial organization matters.�Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui dan memahami tentang kedudukan dan kewenangan Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia serta perbandingannya dengan Komisi Yudisial Belanda. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu yuridis normatif dengan cara perbandingan (komparatif). Data yang digunakan adalah data sekunder sedangkan analisis data dilakukan secara kualitatif. Hasil penelitian yaitu bahwa kedudukan Komisi Yudisial sangat penting, sehinggasecara struktural kedudukannya diposisikan sederajat dengan Mahkamah Agung dan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Namun demikian� secara fungsionalperannya bersifat penunjang (auxiliary) terhadap lembaga kekuasaan kehakiman. Komisi Yudisial meskipun fungsinya terkait dengan kekuasaan kehakiman tetapi bukan� pelaku kekuasaan kehakiman, melainkan lembaga penegak norma etik (code of ethics) dari hakim. Selain itu Komisi Yudisial juga tidak terlibat dalam hal organisasi, personalia, administrasi dan keuangan para hakim. Hal ini berbeda dengan Komisi Yudisial yang ada di negara Eropa misalnya Belanda. Komisi Yudisial di Belanda (Netherland Council for Judiciary) memiliki kewenangan pada area kebijakan teknis dan pembuatan kebijakan pada bidang peradilan.Komisi Yudisial Belanda dan di Eropa pada umumnya mempunyai kewenangan dalam hal mengelola organisasi, anggaran dan administrasi peradilan termasuk dalam melakukan promosi, mutasi, rekruitmen dan memberikan sanksi terhadap hakim. Mahkamah Agung hanya fokus melaksanakan fungsi peradilan yaitu mengadili

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document