scholarly journals Juridicial Analysis on The Implementation of Fiduciary Collateral Execution in The Post-The Constituonal Court’s Ruling No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 262-270
Author(s):  
Cut Nabilla Sarika ◽  
Sunarmi Sunarmi ◽  
Dedi Harianto ◽  
Rudy Haposan Siahaan
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Research Use ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Library Research ◽  
Research Problems ◽  
Legal Consequence ◽  
The Right

Fiduciary collateral as a type of collateral gives the rights of executorial to creditors to do parate execution on the object of fiduciary collateral when a debtor defaults. In practice, however, collateral misuses this right by seizing the collateral coercively and illegally. This becomes the basics for Judicial Review agains Article 15, paraghraphs 2 and 3 of Law No. 42/1999 on Fiduciary Collateral on January 6, 2020, and the Constitutional Court issued the Ruling No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019 which causes dispute in people. The research problems are whether the Constitutional Court’s Ruling is contrary to the collateral which gives easianess for the execution, how about the implementation of parate execution in the post – the Constituonal Court’s Ruling, and how about the legal consequence of debtor and creditor.The research use descriptive juridicial normative method. The data were gathered by conducting library research. The gathered data were analyzed qualitatively. The result of the analysis shows that Ruling does not impede the right of executing by creditors so that it is in accordance with the executorial right in fiduciary collateral, and creditors can still play their role in doing parate execution hen debitors default, on condition that debtors voluntarily hand in the fiduciary collateral. It may be difficult to do this in the foreclosure sale; therefore, it has to be certain in writing the clauses in the fiduciary contract. In this case, a Notary is required to add a clause about default in the contract and should refer to the Constituonal Court’s Ruling No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019 as the legal ground in writing fiduciary collateral contract.

scholarly journals Menyoal Kebebasan Beragama dan Penodaan Agama Di Indonesia

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-212
Author(s):  
Yayan Sopyan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Religious Beliefs ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Reform Era ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

Abstract: Questioning the Religious Freedom and blasphemy in Indonesia. The presence of the Constitutional Court in the reform era is the strengthening of the foundations of constitutionalism in the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945. The Court in this case a role to enforce and the protector of the citizen's constitutional rights and the protector of the human rights. Including in this case, the right to religion and religious practices and teachings of their respective religions, in accordance with the constitutional mandate. However, on the other hand there is the discourse of freedom of expression and freedom of speech includes freedom to broadcast religious beliefs and understanding of the "deviant" and against the "mainstream" religious beliefs and understanding in general, as in the case of Ahmadiyah. The Court in this case is required to provide the best attitude when faced judicial review in this case still required in addition to guarding the constitution in order to run properly.   Abstrak: Menyoal Kebebasan Beragama dan Penodaan Agama di Indonesia. Kehadiran lembaga Mahkamah Konstitusi di era reformasi merupakan upaya penguatan terhadap dasar-dasar konstitusionalisme pada Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. MK dalam hal ini berperan menegakkan dan melindungi hak-hak konstitusional warga negara (the protector of the citizen’s constitutional rights) dan pelindung HAM (the protector of the human rights). Termasuk dalam hal ini, hak untuk memeluk agama dan menjalankan ibadah serta ajaran agamanya masing-masing, sesuai dengan amanat konstitusi. Namun, disisi lain ada wacana kebebasan berekspresi dan kebebasan berpendapat termasuk didalamnya kebebasan untuk menyiarkan keyakinan dan pemahaman keagamaan yang “menyimpang” dan bertentangan dengan “mainstream” keyakinan dan pemahaman keagamaan pada umumnya, seperti dalam kasus Ahmadiyah. MK dalam hal ini dituntut untuk mampu memberikan sikap terbaik saat dihadapkan judicial review dalam kasus ini selain tetap dituntut untuk mengawal konstitusi agar dapat berjalan sebagaimana mestinya. DOI: 10.15408/jch.v2i2.2314

scholarly journals Penegakan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 13/PUU-XV/2017 Mengenai Hak Mendapatkan Pekerjaan dan Hak Membentuk Keluarga

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 858
Author(s):  
Muhammad Reza Winata ◽  
Intan Permata Putri
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Legal Power ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

Jaminan konstitusi terkait hak konstitusional untuk mendapatkan pekerjaan dalam Pasal 28D ayat (2) UUD NRI 1945 dan hak konstitusional untuk membentuk keluarga dalam Pasal 28B ayat (1) UUD 1945 telah dibatasi dengan adanya ketentuan Pasal 153 ayat (1) huruf f Undang-Undang No 13 Tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan. Keberadaan perjanjian kerja menghalangi hak pekerja untuk menikah dalam satu institusi karena pekerja harus mengalami pemutusan hubungan kerja untuk dapat melaksanakan haknya membentuk keluarga yang sebenarnya dijamin dalam konstitusi dan peraturan perundang- undangan. Pengujian Pasal 153 ayat (1) huruf f UU No 13 Tahun 2003 dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 13/PUU-XV/2017 telah menyatakan frasa "kecuali telah diatur dalam perjanjian kerja, peraturan Perusahaan, atau perjanjian kerja bersama" bertentangan dengan UUD 1945. Artikel ini hendak menjawab kekuatan mengikat dan akibat hukum putusan, sekaligus Penegakan putusan dengan memetakan penyelesaian terkait peraturan perundang-undangan dan perjanjian kerja yang tidak tidak sesuai dengan putusan dan bertentangan dengan prinsip kebebasan berkontrak. Penelitian ini didasarkan pada penelitian kualitatif, dimana sumber analisis yakni Putusan MK terkait permasalahan yang diangkat, peraturan perundang-undangan, buku dan artikel ilmiah. Artikel ini hendak memetakan penyelesaian yang sesuai terkait kepada perjanjian kerja yang tidak menjamin hak pekerja yang dijamin dalam konstitusi, serta bertentangan dengan prinsip kebebasan berkontrak. yakni: pertama, penyelarasan peraturan perundang undangan di bawah Undang-undang judicial review di Mahkamah Agung, kedua, penyelesaian perselisihan hak melalui Pengadilan Hubungan Industrian yang akan menguji penegakan putusan dalam perjanjian kerja, peraturan perusahaan, atau perjanjian kerja bersama.The constitutional guarantee regarding constitutional rights to obtain employment in Article 28 D paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and the constitutional rights to form a family in Article 28 B paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution has been limited by the provisions of Article 153 paragraph (1) letter f Law No. 13 of 2003 concerning Labor. The existence of a work agreement prevents the right of workers to get married in one institution because workers must experience termination of employment to be able to exercise their rights to form a family which is actually guaranteed in the constitution and legislation. Testing Article 153 paragraph (1) letter f of Law No. 13 of 2003 in the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 13/PUU-XV/2017 has stated the phrase "except as stipulated in work agreements, company regulations, or collective labor agreements" contrary to the 1945 Constitution. This article is about to answer the binding and consequent legal power of the decision, as well as Enforcement of decisions by mapping out solutions related to legislation and work agreements that are not incompatible with decisions and are contrary to the principle of freedom of contract. This research is based on qualitative research, where the source of analysis is the Constitutional Court Decision related to the issues raised, legislation, scientific books, and articles. This article intends to map appropriate solutions related to work agreements that do not guarantee workers’ rights guaranteed in the constitution, as well as contrary to the principle of freedom of contract. namely: first, alignment of legislation under the judicial review law in the Supreme Court, secondly, settlement of rights disputes through the Industrial Relations Court which will test enforcement of decisions in work agreements, company regulations, or collective labor agreements.

scholarly journals Konsistensi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Pengujian Beberapa Undang-Undang Terkait Kesehatan

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 763
Author(s):  
Ade Irawan Taufik
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Private Matter ◽  
The Right ◽  
Material Tests

 Timbulnya pengakuan kesehatan sebagai hak asasi menunjukan perubahan paradigma yang luar biasa, karena kesehatan tidak lagi dipandang hanya sebagai urusan pribadi namun sebagai bentuk tanggung jawab negara dan hak hukum (legal rights). Tujuan diberlakukannya berbagai undang-undang terkait kesehatan adalah untuk memberikan jaminan konstitusionalitas hak atas kesehatan, namun dengan diberlakukannya berbagai undang-undang tersebut tidak berarti terjaminnya hak konstitusional atas kesehatan, hal ini tergambar dengan banyaknya uji materi terhadap berbagai undang-undang tersebut. Banyaknya permohonan uji materi tersebut menarik untuk diteliti terhadap prinsip-prinsip atau asas-asas yang melandasi materi muatan berbagai undang-undang terkait kesehatan dan konsistensi antar putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) dan konsistensi Putusan MK dengan prinsip atau asas yang melandasi materi muatan undang-undang terkait kesehatan. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif disimpulkan bahwa prinsip-prinsip atau asas mempunyai arti penting sebagai landasan materi undang-undang sehingga dapat dijadikan sebagai batu uji dalam melakukan pengujian undang-undang. Kesimpulan lainnya yakni terdapat inkonsistensi antar putusan MK dan inkonsistensi putusan MK dengan prinsip atas asas yang melandasi materi muatan berbagai undang-undang terkait kesehatan.The emergence of the recognition of health as a human right shows an extraordinary paradigm shift, because health is no longer seen only as a private matter but as a form of state responsibility and legal rights. The purpose of the enactment of various laws related to health is to provide a constitutional guarantee of the right to health, however, the enactment of these various laws does not mean the guarantee of constitutional rights to health, this is showed by the number of judicial review of various laws. The number of requests for material tests is interesting to be examined on the principles that underlie the contents of various health related to laws and consistency between decisions of the Constitutional Court (MK) and consistency of decisions of the Constitutional Court to the principles that underlie the content of laws related to health. By using the normative juridical research method, it can be concluded that principles have an important meaning as a basis for the material of the law so that they can be used as a touchstone in conducting the testing of laws. Another conclusion is that there are inconsistencies between the Constitutional Court's decisions and the inconsistency of the Constitutional Court's decision to the principle on the basis of the material content of various laws related to health.

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.

scholarly journals LIMITATION OF THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH ON THE INDONESIAN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT CONSIDERATION

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-36
Author(s):  
Titis Anindyajati
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Public Order ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Social Media Platforms ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right

Nowadays, everyone tends to use the right to freedom of speech without limitation, such as emergences of hate speech expression on various social media platforms. However, such expression is regulated by Article 28, paragraph (2) of the ITE Law and deemed to be contrary to public order. On the other hand, this law was considered by some people as a criminalization towards the right to freedom of speech. This paradox becomes a big issue that never ceases to be discussed. That is why Constitutional Court had conducted judicial review on some norms related to freedom of speech. This study aims to analyze the Constitutional Court decision towards the polarity of the right to freedom of speech and the public order. This study uses normative research with the statutory, analytical and comparative approach. Therefore, the results show the importance of limitation in implementing the freedom of speech to protect the constitutional right of society as stated in the 1945 Constitution. Despite the already decided judicial review by the Court, there is still an urgency to revise The ITE law in order to clarify certain rules related to hate speech in social media.

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 POLITIK HUKUM PENGATURAN TAP MPR DALAM HIERARKI PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
I Made Aryana Putra Atmaja ◽  
I Nyoman Suyatna
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
State Institution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Agencies ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Political Perspective ◽  
Legal Consequence ◽  
Legal Product

The third Amendment of UUD 1945 in 2001 put the position of MPR is no longer as the highest state institution but equal with another state institutions. This is certainly make a legal consequence to the legal product that produced by MPR and that legal product is Tap MPR. Tap MPR is no longer regulated in hierarchy of legislation in article 7 (1) Constitution No. 10 of 2004 on the establishment of legislation because Tap MPR is not included in the general legislation. But then the issuance of Constitution No. 12 of 2011 set back Tap MPR in hierarchy of legislation because some of Tap MPR is still valid in accordance with the Tap MPR number of I / MPR / 2003 on Judicial Review Matter and Legal Status of the Tap MPR Decree from 1960-2002. If it viewed through a political perspective, it can be said that Tap MPR Decree setting tug in the hierarchy of legislation can be said to be inconsistent of legal political or unclear. Said to be inconsistent or unclear because it is not in line with changes in the MPR authority and contrary to the theory of hierarchy of norms as a result of changes in the authority of MPR must also align with the legislation and do not deserve to be above the legislation. The debate re-occurs when the authority of the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of MPR is considered contrary to the 1945 Constitution questionable. Is the Constitutional Court is authorized to review the constitutionality of Tap MPR towards the UUD 1945? According to the Article 24C of UUD 1945, Constitutional Court is only authorized to review legislation towards UUD 1945. There is void of norm on the authority of the Constitutional Court but on the other side, citizens who feel their constitutional rights are  violated by the existence of the MPR cannot do anything. The Constitutional Court was established with the aim of legislation under the Constitution does not conflict with the UUD 1945, the next purpose is to protect and ensure the constitutional rights of citizens contained in the UUD 1945 in order not to be violated by officials or state agencies. Departed from that purpose then the Constitutional Court is authorized to review the constitutionality of Tap MPR is considered contrary to the UUD 1945.

scholarly journals Imbas Konsistensi Hukuman Mati pada Hubungan Bilateral dalam Kasus Narkoba

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 255
Author(s):  
Moh Rosyid
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
International Convention ◽  
The Reformation ◽  
The Family ◽  
Penal Law ◽  
The Right

<p>This article discusses about the debate over death penalty in the drug abuse cases. The Constitutional Court on October 30<sup>th</sup>, 2007 on the judicial review of Article 80 of the Law No 22/1997 on Drug declared that death penalty is not violating the Constitution which guarantees the right to life. Furthermore, Indonesia has ratified the International convention on narcotics and psychotropic. On the other hand, the opponent of death penalty argues that death penalty violates Article 28A of the Amendment of the Constitution that all people have the right to life. Secondly, death penalty is cruel and inhumane. Thirdly, there is possibility for false trial, and fourth, death penalty is not in-line with the reformation of penal law which imposes on restorative justice instead of retributive. Fifth, the effect is just a myth and sixth, the family becomes co-victim. Seventh, death penalty also threatened Indonesian living abroad and the last, death penalty cause the loss of Indonesia in International relations.</p>

scholarly journals JUDICIAL REVIEW SEBAGAI SARANA PERLINDUNGAN HAK-HAK ASASI WARGA NEGARA

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (22) ◽  
pp. 170-181
Author(s):  
Safi’ Safi’
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Recent Time ◽  
Public Acceptance ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Community Groups ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Observing the development of public acceptance of the substance of the laws that were generated in recent time, the right of judicial review of an option that can not be avoided for the 'correct' errors that might occur in a legal product to guarantee the protection of constitutional rights of citizens. The tendency in this direction can be seen from the desire of some community groups to apply for judicial review and claim that they are legal products containing controversial value both to the Supreme Court nor the Constitutional Court. If prior to the amendment of the 1945 Constitution, laws and regulations that can be petitioned for review of material just under the Act against the Constitution, but after the 1945 amendment, the legislation level as the Act was that the Act and also Perpu material can be petitioned for review to the Constitutional Court.

scholarly journals Separatist Creditors vs Preferred Creditors Rights in the Bankruptcy Case Based on the Decision of Constitutional Court of 2013

FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 231
Author(s):  
Rilda Murniati ◽  
Desma Cahya Selvya
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Labor Law ◽  
Bankruptcy Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Case Based

Workers are preferred creditors whose payment must take precedence in the bankruptcy of the company. Problems in practice occur in the company's assets as collateral for debt to separatist creditors so that workers' rights are ruled out. Therefore, workers submit applications for judicial review of the Bankruptcy Law and Labor Law. This study is normative research using primary legal materials, namely laws and case study decisions that are analysed qualitatively. The results of the study and discussion determined that the Bankruptcy Law and the Labor Law regulate the same as the legal status of workers as preferred creditors who are entitled to prioritize payment in the distribution of bankrupt assets strengthened by the results of a judicial review in Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 67/PUU-XI/2013 The right of workers to wages is prioritized and calculated from collateral objects which are the rights of separatist creditors. For this reason, curators with authority must share the right of separatist creditors and preferred creditors with the principle of balance and justice so that all the assets of a bankrupt company can pay off the debts of its creditors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document