scholarly journals Criticisms toward the job creation bill and ethical reconstruction of legislators based on prophetic values

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 144-160
Author(s):  
Ilham Dwi Rafiqi
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Social Ethics ◽  
Job Creation ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Philosophical Approach ◽  
The Public ◽  
New Form ◽  
Law Making ◽  
Research Show

Post the issuance of Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation, the public paid more attention by continuing to protest and criticize. This response occurred due to various legislative deviations noticed during the legislative process of the Job Creation Bill by not adhering to the principles and procedures for the formation of laws and regulations. The main cause for this deviation is due to the ethics of the legislators who are not thoroughly compliant and obedient toward the statutory regulations and social ethics. Legislators’ understanding of law and life tends to be influenced by materialistic-positivistic views that bring forth consumptive, hedonistic, and secular demeanors and behaviors. On this basis, this paper tries to criticize and reconstruct the legislators’ ethics in law-making. This study is using a normative juridical method and is supported by a philosophical approach. The outcomes of this research show that the process in the making of the Job Creation Bill tends to override the principle of transparency and public participation with a closed and hasty pattern so that it is a complete ulterior hasty agenda that prioritizes the concept of regulating and monitoring only (top-down). A work ethic based on prophetic values that are supported by the ground principles of a prophetic paradigm that includes humanization, liberation, and transcendence into a new form of construction to be able to create a better and just legislative process.

scholarly journals EFFICIENT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE LOCAL LAW-MAKING PROCESS

Yuridika ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 389
Author(s):  
Ekawestri Prajwalita Widiati
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Citizen Participation ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Discovery Education ◽  
Education Measurement ◽  
Local Law ◽  
Law Making ◽  
The Ideal

Getting the public to participate in the government’s policy reflects a sense of control in democracy. However, constructing a mechanism of participation in legal provisions could be dilemma. It is important to realize that involving citizen in local government decision making particularly in law-making process has a fundamental difficulties; the essence of participation itself (openness and transparency) and the need to be efficient. This essay formulated an effective mechanism of public participation by juxtaposing steps in the local legislative process with the criteria of efficiency. This discussion is trying to encompass citizen participation from the initiation of a policy until it is enacted as a local legislation. Then in the next step, it will assess the elements that constitute an efficient drafting process. This article will consider such factors that are; financial cost; human resources or effort; wasted time; risk of failure; progress. The hypothesis is that not all of the means of public participation are efficient. The ideal notion of public participation put weighs on Local Authorities. What is needed to be underlined in this discussion is, to maximize the advantage of citizen involvement, it is important to look at the sequence where it should be held and what is the content. Moreover, the process of public participation should reflects principles namely: discovery, education, measurement, persuasion and legitimization.

scholarly journals Philosophical Approach to the Statutory Drafting

2020 ◽  
Vol 92 ◽  
pp. 51-60
Author(s):  
Martin Škop
Keyword(s):  
Legislative Process ◽  
Primary Control ◽  
Philosophical Approach ◽  
The Public ◽  
Global Capital ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
Informal Regulation ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Law Making

This article traces the relationship between the law-making process and narratives. Undoubtedly, how statutes are created is a constitutional question, yet the Constitution regulates only part of this process. Constitution or any statute does not regulate parts of the legislative process implemented by the government (mostly preliminary phases). However, they are important and influence the remaining parts of the law-making process. This government’s activity is the sphere of informal regulation hidden from the primary control of the public. This article explores the importance of the bureaucratic elements of the law-making process with emphasis on a narrative approach: narratives justify legislature. How can we overcome the two lines of narratives – one produced by global capital and the other represented by national experience?

11. The key functions of Parliament

2019 ◽  
pp. 229-254
Author(s):  
Anne Dennett
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
Government Action ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Record ◽  
The Government ◽  
And Control ◽  
Law Making

This chapter identifies Parliament's primary functions of making law and scrutinising government action. Parliament's scrutiny of government has been defined as ‘the process of examining expenditure, administration, and policy in detail, on the public record, requiring the government of the day to explain itself to parliamentarians as representatives of the citizen and the taxpayer, and to justify its actions’. In the absence of a codified constitution and entrenched limits on executive power, the requirement for the government to answer to Parliament for its actions acts as a check and control. The chapter also considers the legislative process, particularly legislative scrutiny. Secondary legislation made by the government can often be subject to much less scrutiny and debate than primary legislation, and sometimes none at all. These scrutiny gaps increase the risk of arbitrary law-making and ‘governing from the shadows’, again raising rule of law concerns.

11. The key functions of Parliament

2021 ◽  
pp. 243-270
Author(s):  
Anne Dennett
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
Government Action ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Record ◽  
The Government ◽  
And Control ◽  
Law Making

This chapter identifies Parliament’s primary functions of making law and scrutinising government action. Parliament’s scrutiny of government has been defined as ‘the process of examining expenditure, administration, and policy in detail, on the public record, requiring the government of the day to explain itself to parliamentarians as representatives of the citizen and the taxpayer, and to justify its actions’. In the absence of a codified constitution and entrenched limits on executive power, the requirement for the government to answer to Parliament for its actions acts as a check and control. The chapter also considers the legislative process, particularly legislative scrutiny. Secondary legislation made by the government can often be subject to much less scrutiny and debate than primary legislation, and sometimes none at all. These scrutiny gaps increase the risk of arbitrary law-making and ‘governing from the shadows’, again raising rule of law concerns.

scholarly journals FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF THE LEGISLATION PROCESS

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-64
Author(s):  
Yassar Aulia ◽  
Ali Abdurahman ◽  
Mei Susanto
Keyword(s):  
Fast Track ◽  
Job Creation ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Second Amendment ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Analytical Research ◽  
Law Making

The Indonesian legislative process in recent years has been facing various serious procedural flaws. Most notably illustrated by at least three contemporary cases, namely regarding the process of the second amendment to Law No. 30 of 2002 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission (hereinafter referred to as the KPK Law); the third amendment to Law No. 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court (MK Law); and the formation of Law No. 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation (Job Creation Law). The purpose of this paper is to see whether in practice, the legislative process in Indonesia has aligned itself with the fundamental principles of the legislative process and to see whether the legal framework regarding procedures during the law-making process are adequate. Through descriptive analytical research and comparative approach with the United Kingdom, this paper found that the Indonesian law-making process in practice is not in line with the fundamental principles of the legislative process. We also found that the legal framework regarding the procedure for making laws in Indonesia to be inadequate and therefore we suggest that it can draw some lessons from the practices of the British Parliament. Abstrak: Pembentukan undang-undang (UU) di Indonesia dalam beberapa tahun terakhir memiliki berbagai kecacatan prosedural yang serius.  Kekacauan proses legislasi di Indonesia paling terang terilustrasikan jika melihat setidaknya tiga kasus kontemporer, yakni mengenai proses pembentukan UU No. 19 Tahun 2019 tentang Perubahan Kedua atas UU No. 30 Tahun 2002 tentang Komisi Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi (selanjutnya disebut UU KPK), UU No. 7 Tahun 2020 tentang Perubahan Ketiga atas UU No. 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi (UU MK), dan UU No. 11 Tahun 2020 tentang Cipta Kerja (UU Cipta Kerja). Tujuan dari tulisan ini adalah untuk melihat apakah dalam praktik, proses pembentukan UU di Indonesia telah menyelaraskan diri dengan prinsip-prinsip fundamental proses pembentukan undang-undang dan melihat apakah pranata hukum prosedural yang berlaku telah memadai. Melalui spesifikasi penelitian deskriptif analitis dan pendekatan perbandingan hukum dengan Britania Raya, hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa praktik pembentukan undang-undang di Indonesia belum selaras dengan prinsip-prinsip fundamental proses pembentukan undang-undang. Pranata hukum mengenai prosedur pembentukan UU yang ada di Indonesia juga kami temukan belum memadai dan oleh karenanya dapat mengambil beberapa pelajaran dari praktik Parlemen Britania Raya. Kata Kunci: Fast-Track Legislation, Omnibus Law, Pembentukan Undang-Undang, Perbandingan Hukum, Prinsip Prosedural

scholarly journals WHAT SHOULD BE THE FORM OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE LAWMAKING PROCESS? AN ANALYSIS OF SOUTH AFRICAN CASES

Obiter ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Moses Retselisitsoe Phooko
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
South African ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Participatory Democracy ◽  
Representative Democracy ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
The People ◽  
The Law ◽  
Law Making

South Africa’s new constitutional democracy places a duty on various legislators to facilitate public participation in the law-making process as mandated by the principles of participatory democracy provided for in the Constitution of South Africa, 1996. This has resulted in a series of court cases wherein the electorate, inter alia, challenged the legislation on the basis that the results did not reflect the views of the people. The courts’ earlier jurisprudence seemed to be placing more emphasis on participatory democracy as opposed to representative democracy. However, recent court decisions indicate a shift towards representative democracy. The central question presented in this paper is whether the consideration of the views of the public by the provincial and national legislatures is merely a matter of procedure, or that those views are indeed considered in the law-making process. In an attempt to answer this question, the paper will evaluate and critique some of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal decisions on public involvement in either the legislative or law-making process. The argument presented in this discourse is that, if the public’s wishes are considered by the legislature, then the outcome would be influenced by the people’s demands. An otherwise negative outcome shows that public participation in the law-making process is a procedural matter and has no substantive value.

scholarly journals Omnibus Law in Indonesia: A Comparison to the United States and Ireland

Lentera Hukum ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 319
Author(s):  
Bayu Dwi Anggono ◽  
Fahmi Ramadhan Firdaus
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Job Creation ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Critical Discourse ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
Methods And Techniques ◽  
The Ideal

Recently, omnibus law has become a critical discourse in Indonesia, both academically and practically. This discourse emerges from the relatively fast drafting and ratification of the Job Creation Law. This law's formation uses the omnibus law method because it contains many laws' substance into one law. One of Indonesia's fundamental issues is the absence of rules, methods, and techniques for forming the omnibus law. On the other hand, the techniques and methods of forming these omnibus laws have been practiced in various countries to accelerate the legislative process and organize regulations. However, public participation becomes one of the fundamental shortcomings to draft the legislation under omnibus law. This article aims to review and compare the omnibus law concept applied in selected countries, referencing the United States and Ireland as the model. This article also analyzes how to form the ideal omnibus law by learning from the omnibus law application in other countries that have successfully implemented it first. This study finds that omnibus laws in the United States and Ireland contribute to ushering hyper-regulation symptoms that are vulnerable and hamper economic development. The above comparison needs to be adjusted to the Indonesian context to enact the omnibus law. KEYWORDS: Omnibus Law, Indonesian Law, Comparative Omnibus Law.

The Lawmaking Process as a Combination of Conditional and Unconditional

2020 ◽  
pp. 72-76
Author(s):  
G. N. Utkin
Keyword(s):  
Legislative Process ◽  
Complex Combination ◽  
Law Making

The article substantiates that lawmaking is a process characterized by a complex combination of conditional and unconditional. In spite of the predominance of the conditional in its characterization, there must always be something in it that is self-conditioned, immutable and irresistible, and is therefore capable of being the source of the unconditionality of the prescriptions that result from law-making. In modern States, the importance of conditional lawmaking is compensated by the unconditionality of procedural and procedural requirements underlying the organization of the legislative process.

Partisipasi Masyarakat dalam Proses Kebijakan Daerah

2012 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-177
Author(s):  
Abdullah Manshur
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Policy Evaluation ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Problem Situation ◽  
Policy Cycle ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Policy Making Process

Public policy is a decision to deal with a particular problem situation, that identifies the objectives, principles, ways, and means to achieve them. The ability and understanding of policy makers in the policy-making process is very important for the realization of public policy of rapid, accurate and adequate. The product to suit the needs of the public policy, public participation in the policy process is needed in the policy cycle, from policy formulation to policy evaluation. This paper attempts to review the importance of community participation and other forms of public participation in the policy process, in particular, policy areas.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document