scholarly journals PEMBUBARAN PARTAI POLITIK DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN INDONESIA

Jurnal Hukum ◽  
1970 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 612
Author(s):  
Widayati

Indonesia is a sovereign country folk. One implementation of the sovereignty of the people is the election that followed by political parties for members of Parliament and members of parliament and individuals for DPD.Political parties are the main pillars of democracy. Establishment of political parties must meet the requirements in accordance with legislation. Terms of founding a political party regulated under Article 2 of Law No. 2 of 2008 on Political Parties.As the main pillar of democracy, political parties should be able to carry out its functions properly. There are some restrictions on political parties, among others, are prohibited from engaging in activities contrary to the Constitution of 1945 NRI and legislation; engage in activities that endanger the integrity and safety Homeland. If the ban is violated, then the government may ask the parties to the freezing of the District Court. If the parties do not accept the decision of freezing the District Court, it can be appealed to the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court confirmed the decision of the PN, then the Government may propose the dissolution of the parties to the Court.The procedure by which parties to the Court daitur dissolution under Article 68 paragraph (1) and (2) of Law No 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court. Constitutional Court's decision regarding the request for the dissolution of political parties must be decided upon within a period of 60 (sixty) days after pemoohonan recorded in the Register of Case Constitution.Keywords: Parati dissolution of political, constitutional systemIndonesia

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 35
Author(s):  
Tri Cahya Indra Permana

Undang-Undang Parpol mengatur bahwa perselisihan Parpol diselesaikan secara internal oleh Mahkamah Partai atau sebutan lain daripada itu dan secara eksternal oleh Pengadilan Negeri dan Mahkamah Agung. Substansi perselisihan yang final dan mengikat di Mahkamah Partai adalah perselisihan kepengurusan, selebihnya dapat diajukan upaya hukum ke Pengadilan Negeri dan Mahkamah Agung. Di dalam praktek, pengaturan tersebut telah menjauhkan dari rasa keadilan, kepastian hukum dan kemanfaatan, oleh karenanya sebaiknya direvisi yang mana perselisihan PAW, pelanggaran terhadap hak anggota partai politik, penyalahgunaan wewenang,  pertanggungjawaban keuangan, dan atau keberatan terhadap keputusan partai politik (termasuk keputusan untuk tidak memutuskan terhadap sesuatu hal) final dan mengikat dengan Putusan MPP. Sedangkan perselisihan kepengurusan dapat diajukan upaya hukum ke Mahkamah Konstitusi. Political parties act stipulates that a political party dispute resolved internally by the Mahkamah Partai or other designation of that and externally resolved by the District Court and the Supreme Court. The dispute substance in Mahkamah Partai which is final and binding is about organization dispute, the other can be settled in District Court and the Supreme Court. In practice, that arrangement makes the decision apart from the sense of justice, legal certainty and utility. Therefore, these rules should be revised so that the regulation of PAW, violations of the rights of members of political parties, abuse of authority, financial liability, or an objection to the decision of political parties (including the decision not to decide on something) is final and binding through Mahkamah Partai decision. While the organization disputes can be submitted to the Constitutional Court for legal action.


Author(s):  
Lawrence Baum ◽  
Neal Devins

Today’s ideological division on the U.S. Supreme Court is also a partisan division: all the Court’s liberals were appointed by Democratic presidents, all its conservatives by Republican presidents. That pattern never existed in the Court until 2010, and this book focuses on how it came about and why it’s likely to continue. Its explanation lies in the growing level of political polarization over the last several decades. One effect of polarization is that potential nominees will reflect the dominant ideology of the president’s political party. Correspondingly, the sharpened ideological division between the two political parties has given presidents stronger incentives to give high priority to ideological considerations. In addition to these well-known effects of polarization, The Company They Keep explores what social psychologists have taught us about people’s motivations. Justices take cues primarily from the people who are closest to them and whose approval they care most about: political, social, and professional elites. In an era of strong partisan polarization, elite social networks are largely bifurcated by partisan and ideological elites, and justices such as Clarence Thomas and Ruth Bader Ginsburg live in milieus populated by like-minded elites that reinforce their liberalism or conservatism during their tenure on the Supreme Court. By highlighting and documenting this development, the book provides a new perspective on the Court and its justices.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-104
Author(s):  
Rustam Magun Pikahulan

Abstract: The Plato's conception of the rule of law states that good governance is based on good law. The organization also spreads to the world of Supreme Court justices, the election caused a decadence to the institutional status of the House of Representatives as a people's representative in the government whose implementation was not in line with the decision of the Constitutional Court. Based on the decision of the Constitutional Court No.27/PUU-XI/2013 explains that the House of Representatives no longer has the authority to conduct due diligence and suitability (elect) to prospective Supreme Judges proposed by the Judicial Commission. The House of Representatives can only approve or disapprove candidates for Supreme Court Justices that have been submitted by the Judicial Commission. In addition, the proportion of proposed Supreme Court Justices from the judicial commission to the House of Representatives (DPR) has changed, whereas previously the Judicial Commission had to propose 3 (three) of each vacancy for the Justices, now it is only one of each vacant for Supreme Court Judges. by the Supreme Court. The House of Representatives no longer has the authority to conduct due diligence and suitability (elect) to prospective Supreme Judges proposed by the Judicial Commission. The House of Representatives can only "approve" or "disagree" the Supreme Judge candidates nominated by the Judicial Commission.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 364
Author(s):  
Yanzah Bagas Nugraha ◽  
Dwi Andayani Budisetyowati

The establishment of the Regional Representative Council of the Republic of Indonesia so called Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPD-RI) at least has two objectives. The first is to enhance justice for the people in the region. Secondly, to expanding and increasing the participation of local communities in national life. The process to form this state institution is done by amending the 3rd amendment of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic Indonesia. However, in doing that  amendment there was an internal conflict within the body of DPD-RI involving the old and the new leaders of this institution last year. The length of leadership tenure which was initially made 5 years was amended to became 2.5 years. The different length of leadership tenure was then canceled by the Supreme Court and it was decided to be the same as other institution such as The People’s Consultative Assembly and The House of Representative in that the leadership tenure should be in accordance with the electoral cycle of 5 years. However, although the regulation of DPD-RI has been canceled, the Supreme Court keeps sending its representative to guide the oath of position of the new DPD-RI leadership. The only regulation that has been introduced by the state was regulation toward conflict between state institutions and this conflict can merely be resolved by the Constitutional Court. Therefore, there is an urgent need for the state to seek solution to solve this problem to prevent the same thing happened to other state institution in the future.


Author(s):  
Mercedes Iglesias Bárez

The case is somewhat Bildu a break with the doctrine that the Constitutional Court has constructed about the outlawing of political parties. The control of political parties in the process of proclamation of candidates, the value of the condemnation of terrorism and the role to be played to the High Court in monitoring the decisions of the Supreme Court, are in part a new meaning in the controversial decision the Constitutional Court.El caso Bildu representa, en cierta forma, una ruptura con la doctrina que el Tribunal Constitucional ha construido acerca de la ilegalización de partidos políticos. El control de formaciones políticas en la fase de proclamación de candidatos, el valor de la condena del terrorismo o el papel que le corresponde desempeñar al Alto Tribunal en la fiscalización de las decisiones del Tribunal Supremo, tienen en parte un nuevo sentido en la controvertida decisión del Tribunal Constitucional.


2018 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 01003
Author(s):  
Suparto ◽  
Rahdiansyah

Boundary dispute is a new phenomenon that occurred in the era of regional autonomy followed by the expansion of the region. One of them occurred between Kepulauan Riau and Jambi Provinces related to Berhala Island ownership. Settlement of disputes between these two provinces took quite a long time and also caused tensions between two provinces. Actually, the government through the Ministry of Home Affairs has issued a regulation to solve the boundary problem of this area namely the Minister of Home Affairs Regulation No.1 in 2006 and No. 76 in 2012 on Guidelines for Confirmation of the Boundaries, however, is still less effective because although it has been done in such a way the party who feels aggrieved still take another way that is by testing the legislation to the Supreme Court or Mahkamah Konstitusional (Constitutional Court). An example is the boundary dispute between Kepulauan Riau and Jambi Province which was resolved through the examination of legislation to the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. In the case, there were 3 decisions, namely Supreme Court Decision No.49P/HUM/2011, Decision of the Constitutional Court No. 32/PUU-X/2012 and the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 62/PUU-X/2012. Based on the research results obtained as follows 1). Implementation of the principle or legal principle of lex posterior derogat lex priori by the Supreme Court 2). The decision of the Supreme Court was taken into consideration in the decision of the Constitutional Court 3). The cause of the territorial boundary disputes between Kepulauan Riau Province and Jambi Province was the synchronization of 3 related laws namely Indonesian Law no. 31 in 2003, Law no. 25 in 2002 and Law no. 54 of 1999.


Author(s):  
Ishaq Rahman ◽  
Elyta Elyta

ABSTRACT A country that implements the system as mentioned earlier is more towards an authoritarian system of government which aims to dominate and dominate the power of the state towards the people. Democracy cannot survive from such a closed state. In a basic concept of democracy, there is a fundamental principle, namely the principle of sovereignty of the people who run the government.Political communication is one of the many roles played by political parties in various available arrangements. The political party is required to communicate knowledge, issues and political thoughts.Constitutionally, the Government adopts a Presidential System in which the ministers in the cabinet are responsible to the president. But in practice the SBY-JK administration is more of a Parliamentary System. Keywords: political parties, democracy, SBY government


Author(s):  
Hasir Budiman Ritonga

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


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 257
Author(s):  
Sulistyani Eka Lestari ◽  
Ahmad Siboy

The number of political parties continues to increase from time to time. Ironically, the establishment of a political party is not based on the desire to carry out the functions of political education, political recruitment, and political regeneration. It is only to fulfill the desire for the power of a group of political elites. This research aims to analyze the need to simplify the number of political parties and determine the ideal simplification design of political parties This research used normative juridical research with statutory, historical, and conceptual approaches. The results indicated that political party simplification is needed for creating effectiveness and efficiency, minimizing segmentation or the emergence of friction among Indonesian citizens, preventing voter confusion, and maintaining political stability. Meanwhile, the ideal design to simplify political parties that can be executed is through submitting the dissolution of political parties to the Constitutional Court (Indonesian: Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK)) by expanding the criteria for those who can propose for dissolution (legal standing), imposing strict sanctions, implementing a moratorium on permits for the establishment of new parties, and extending the authority of the government to unilaterally dissolve political parties, such as the power to dissolve banned community organizations.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 131
Author(s):  
Moch. Marsa Taufiqurrohman

Artikel ini berupaya meninjau kembali praktik koalisi partai politik di tengah sistem presidensial pasca reformasi, dan menilai sejauh mana dampaknya terhadap kestabilan pemerintahan. Pasca reformasi 1998, sejumlah besar partai politik telah didirikan, menunjukkan bahwa munculnya fragmentasi politik adalah sesuatu yang tidak terhindarkan. Alih-alih melaksanakan pemerintahan secara sehat, partai politik membentuk koalisi untuk memperkuat kedudukan mereka di parlemen. Implikasi penerapan multi partai dalam sistem presidensial ini seringkali menimbulkan deadlock antara eksekutif dan legislatif. Sistem presidensial yang dikombinasikan dengan sistem multi partai dapat menjadi sistem yang stabil dan efektif dengan cara penyederhanaan partai politik, desain pelembagaan koalisi, dan pengaturan pelembagaan oposisi. Namun di sisi lain koalisi juga menjadi sangat berpengaruh pada stabilitas pemerintahan. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif, artikel ini bertujuan untuk meneliti politik hukum terkait praktik koalisi partai politik di Indonesia dan mengetahui upaya-upaya dalam praktik ketatanegaraan yang dapat merealisasikan stabilitas sistem pemerintahan presidensial pada koalisi di multi partai. Artikel ini menemukan kesimpulan bahwa model pemilihan legislatif dan eksekutif yang dipilih langsung oleh rakyat justru menjadi penyebab disharmonisasi antara legislatif dan eksekutif yang mengarah kepada terjadinya kebuntuan antar kedua lembaga tersebut. Lebih-lebih apabila yang menguasai lembaga ekesekutif dan lembaga legislatif adalah dari latar belakang partai politik yang berbeda. Akibatnya, praktik koalisi seperti ini cenderung mengakibatkan lebih banyak masalah, sehingga penerapan sistem ini memiliki dampak signifikan terhadap demokrasi yang didefinisikan dan dinegosiasikan. This article attempts to review the practice of coalitions of political parties in the post-reform presidential system and assess the extent of their impact on the stability of the government. Post-1998 reform, a large number of political parties have been established, suggesting that the emergence of political fragmentation is inevitable. Instead of implementing a healthy government, political parties formed coalitions to strengthen their positions in parliament. The implication of implementing multi-party in the presidential system often creates deadlocks between the executive and the legislature. A presidential system combined with a multi-party system can become a stable and effective system by simplifying political parties, designing institutionalized coalitions, and organizing opposition institutions. But on the other hand, the coalition has also greatly influenced the stability of the government. By using normative juridical research methods, this article aims to examine legal politics related to the practice of political party coalitions in Indonesia and to find out the efforts in state administration practices that can realize the stability of the presidential system of government in multi-party coalitions. This article finds the conclusion that the legislative and executive election models directly elected by the people are the cause of disharmony between the legislature and the executive which leads to a deadlock between the two institutions. This is even more so if those who control the executive and legislative bodies are from different political party backgrounds. As a result, coalition practices like this are likely to cause more problems, so the adoption of these systems has a significant impact on defined and negotiated democracy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document