SINKRONISASI MATERI MUATAN PERDA BERBASIS SYARIAH

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-77
Author(s):  
Hayatun Na’imah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Hierarchical Structure ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Regional Autonomy ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Hierarchical Structure ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Legislative Review

The regional regulation (Perda) as one of the legal products prevails in the Republic of Indonesia (RI) has its place in the hierarchical structure of the Indonesian legislation. The emergence of Shari'a-based local regulations in various regions in Indonesia is related to the emergence of regional autonomy. Shari'a based regional regulations cannot be directly said to be good or not according to the law, nor can it be said to be in line with or contrary to the existing legislation. There are several parameters to assess the regional regulations, namely by the Executive Review conducted by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Judicial Review carried out by the Supreme Court and the Legislative Review by the Legislature. Through these parameters it can be seen whether Sharia-based regional regulation (Perda) are referred to as part of the existing legislation in Indonesia.  

scholarly journals EFFECTIVENESS IN IMPLEMENTING SUPREME COURT REGULATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA NUMBER 2 YEAR 2015 ON PROCEDURES SETTLEMENT OF SIMPLE LAWSUIT IN SETTLING THE CIVIL CASES

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
Wiryatmo Lukito Totok ◽  
Anik Iftitah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Culture ◽  
District Court ◽  
Code System ◽  
Medium Term ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Civil Cases ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Effectiveness Index

President Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 2 Year 2015 on the National Medium Term Development Plan 2015-2019 mandates to carry out Reformation of the Civil Code system which is easy and fast, in an effort to improve the competitiveness of national economy. Related to this, the Supreme Court answered the vacancy of a simple lawsuit by issuing Regulation of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia (PERMA) Number 2 Year 2015 on procedures for settlement of simple suit in settling civil cases. The empirical juridical research in the Court of Kediri showed that the implementation of Regulation of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 2 Year 2015 made the lawsuit procedure simpler and very effective and in accordance with the principle of simple, fast and light cost. Effectiveness Index of Regulation of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 2 year 2015 at Kediri District Court Class I B was in the "good" category, influenced by substance rule of the law, legal culture, structure of the law, and community knowledge. Keywords: Effectiveness, Simple Lawsuit Received: 07 January, 2017; Accepter: 15 March, 2017

scholarly journals MENAKAR PROGRESIFITAS LEMBAGA PERADILAN DALAM MEWUJUDKAN DEMOKRASI BERINTEGRITAS

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 2102-2117
Author(s):  
Alda Rifada Rizqi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Legal Positivism ◽  
The People ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Will ◽  
The Law ◽  
Corrupt Behavior

Democracy with integrity will be realized if carried out in accordance with the will of the people as holders of sovereignty, the KPU (Komisi Pemilihan Umum) as the election organizer has the authority to make regulations that support a better democracy. KPU (Komisi Pemilihan Umum) Regulation No. 20 of 2018 as evidence that the KPU is committed to participating in preventing corrupt behavior. It was considered to have been considered as an effort to protect the interests of the people, but the regulation was submitted to a judicial review at the Supreme Court. Then, based on legal-formal considerations and based on the legal positivism of the Supreme Court, the request for the test is granted. The decision distanced itself from progressive legal values that justified the denial of what was regulated in legislation in order to put forward the values of public justice, because basically the law was made to fulfill human interests, accommodating the will of the people for the sake of order.

scholarly journals MODEL PENGUJIAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN SATU ATAP MELALUI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 247
Author(s):  
Sholahuddin Al-Fatih
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Regulatory Testing ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Bureaucratic Reform

Post-reform of the role of judicial institution is run by two institutions namely the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. The duties and authorities of the two institutions are regulated in the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia 1945 and the act that addresses the three institutions more specifically. Several powers possessed by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, one of them is the authority to judicial review. The Constitutional Court is authorized to review the act on the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia 1945, while the Supreme Court is authorized to review under the Act on the above legislation.The unfairness of the regulatory testing function is feared to trigger bureaucratic inefficiency. Based on data released by the Supreme Court Clerk, it was recorded during 2016 that the Supreme Court received 18,514 cases, including the Hak Uji Materi (HUM) subject to legislation under the Act. While the number of cases of judicial review of the Constitutional Court in 2016-2017 amounted to only 332 cases. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a bureaucratic reform and provide new ideas related to the model of one court of judicial review in Indonesia. So that in this paper will be discussed deeply about problematic of judicial review in Indonesia and the authority of the Constitutional Court to review the act under one roof with SIJURI mechanism.

scholarly journals Legal Aid by the State as a Constitutional Right of the Poor: Problems and Challenges in Indonesia

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-196
Author(s):  
Ari Wibowo ◽  
Michael Hagana Bangun
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Aid ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

The provision of legal aid is one way to realize access to law and justice for the poor people provided by the state on the mandate of the constitution. Several regulations regarding legal aid have been issued by the state through the Act and its implementing regulations as well as from the Supreme Court or the Constitutional Court through the Supreme Court Regulations and the Constitutional Court's decisions. Legal aid is the constitutional right of every citizen to guarantee legal protection and guarantee equality before the law stipulated in Law Number 16 of 2011, the State is responsible for recognizing and protecting the human rights of every individual without differing backgrounds so that everyone has the right to be treated equally before the law is contained in Article 28D of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. For the poor who experience legal problems in the form of injustice, they can request legal assistance from legal aid institutions that are regulated in legislation. The purpose of providing legal aid is to guarantee and fulfill the right for Legal Aid Recipients to gain access to justice, to realize the constitutional rights of all citizens in accordance with the principle of equality in law, to ensure the certainty that the implementation of Legal Aid is carried out equally across the territory of the Republic of Indonesia. , and to create an effective, efficient and accountable court.

scholarly journals Pengujian Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Marwan Hsb
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Form Of Government ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

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

scholarly journals Analisis Yuridis terhadap Legalitas Qanun Aceh No. 6/2014 tentang Hukum Jinayat

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-148
Author(s):  
Endri Ismail
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Criminal Justice Reform ◽  
Unitary State ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law

Penelitian ini berupaya memaparkan legalitas Qanun Aceh Nomor 6 Tahun 2014 tentang Hukum Jinayat (Qanun Jinayah) dalam konstruksi hukum tata negara Indonesia. Untuk menganalisis hal tersebut, penelitian ini akan meninjau legalitas Qanun Jinayah dari dua sudut pandang, yaitu formalitas pembentukan peraturan perundang-undangan dan konsep negara kesatuan. Qanun Jinayah menuai banyak perdebatan disebabkan kedudukannya sebagai peraturan daerah (perda) namun bermateri muatan pidana Islam (jinayah) yang sama sekali belum diatur dalam peraturan perundang-undangan di level nasional. Tahun 2015, Qanun Jinayah dilakukan uji materiil ke Mahkamah Agung oleh Perkumpulan Masyarakat Pembaharuan Peradilan Pidana (ICJR) namun permohonan uji materiil ini dinyatakan tidak dapat diterima dengan alasan prematur (belum waktunya). Analisis yuridis dari perspektif hukum ketatanegaraan ini penting dilakukan mengingat legalitas sebuah peraturan perundang-undangan menentukan validitas dan kekuatan berlakunya. Yuridical Analysis of the Legality of Qanun Aceh Number 6 Year 2014 on Jinayat Law This research attempts to describe the legality of Qanun Aceh Number 6 Year 2014 on Jinayat Law (Qanun Jinayah) in the construction of Indonesian constitutional law. To analyze it, this study will examine the legality of Qanun Jinayah from two perspectives, those are the formality of the formulation of legislation and the concept of a unitary state. Qanun Jinayah gets  a lot of debate because of its position as a Regional Regulation (Peraturan Daerah), but the material of Islamic criminal content (Jinayah) which has not been regulated in national legislation. In 2015, Qanun Jinayat is subjected to a judicial review to the Supreme Court by the Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR), but this petition is declared unacceptable on a premature reason (unspecified). Judicial analysis from the perspective of constitutional law is important to do due to the legality of a legislation determines the validity and strenght of the law.

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 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 Ajaran Turut Serta Tindak Pidana Korupsi

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-52
Author(s):  
Harry Arfhan ◽  
Mohd. Din ◽  
Sulaiman Sulaiman
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Banda Aceh

Penyertaan pada dasarnya diatur dalam pasal 55 dan 56 KUHP yang berarti bahwa ada dua orang atau lebih yang melakukan suatu tindak pidana atau dengan perkataan ada dua orangatau lebih mengambil bahagian untuk mewujudkan suatu tindak pidana. Penyertaan di dalam Undang-Undang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi yaitu Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 jo Undang-Undang Nomor 20 tahun 2001 disebut sebagai pembantuan.Dalam putusan Kasasi Mahkamah Agung Nomor : 1769 K/PID.SUS/2015 menyatakan bahwa Terdakwa I Indra Gunawan Bin Alm. Saleh tersebut tidak terbukti secara sah dan menyakinkan bersalah melakukan perbuatan sebagaimana yang didakwakan dalam semua dakwaan Penuntut Umum dan Menyatakan Terdakwa II Irfan Bin Husen telah terbukti secara sah dan meyakinkan bersalah melakukan tindak pidana “Turut Serta Melakukan Korupsi”. Majelis Hakim Judex Factie Pengadilan Tinggi/Tipikor Banda Aceh dalam memeriksa dan mengadili perkara Aquo telah salah dalam menerapkan hukum atau suatu peraturan hukum tidak diterapkan atau diterapkan tidak sebagaimana mestinya, yaitu mengenai penerapan hukum pembuktian sehingga harus dibatalkan oleh Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia.The participation is basically regulated in articles 55 and 56 of the Criminal Code, which means that there are two or more people who commit a crime or say that there are two or more people taking part to realize a crime. The participation in the Law on the Eradication of Corruption Crime namely Law Number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with Law Number 20 of 2001 is referred to as assistance. In the decision of the Supreme Court Cassation Number: 1769 K / PID.SUS / 2015 stated that Defendant I Indra Gunawan Bin Alm. Saleh is not proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing an act as charged in all charges of the Public Prosecutor and Stating Defendant II Irfan Bin Husen has been proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing a criminal offense "Also Participating in Corruption". Judex Factie Judge of the High Court / Corruption Court in Banda Aceh in examining and adjudicating the case of Aquo has been wrong in applying the law or a legal regulation was not applied or applied improperly, namely regarding the application of verification law so that it must be canceled by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document