scholarly journals Politik Legislasi Dewan Perwakilan Daerah Republik Indonesia Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 92/PUU-X/2012

2015 ◽  
pp. 101-110
Author(s):  
King Faisal Sulaiman
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Presidential System ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Legislative Review

The Constitutional Court Decision, Number 92/PUU-X/2012 has opened a new legislation policy for the Senate of Indonesia. The impact of this decision can strengthen legislation competence to the Senate in inisiating the legal drafting, as attributed on Article 22D of the 1945 Constitution of Republic of Indonensia. The decision can be a landmark decision for struggling the strong bicameral system and presidential system after amendment of the 1945 Constitution. As the impact of the decision, the house of representatives must soon take legislative review especially to Act Number 27 of 2009 and Act Number 12 of 2011 to accommodate the legal substance of the decision (The Constitutional Court Decision, Number 92/PUU-X/2012).

scholarly journals IMPLIKASI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 92/PUU-X/2012 DAN ALTERNATIF MODEL HUBUNGAN KELEMBAGAAN TERKAIT PEMBENTUKAN UNDANG-UNDANG

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Enny Nurbaningsih
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Decision Authority ◽  
Presidential System ◽  
Relationship Model ◽  
Institutional Construction

Presidential System Government as the result of 1945 Constitution Amandments has not been accomplised yet since its implementation reminds anomaly. President (executive) in presidential system has decision authority to produce acts with House of Representatives (DPR), without involving People Council (DPD) as one of parlement chambers. To restore DPD legislation role, Constitutional Court Decision No. 91/PUU-X/2012 states that DPD has equal position with DPR and President in acts establishment. It implicates that DPD should be involved since the legislation planning, but still does not have authority to make decision even for bills concerned with its authority. This Constitutional Court brings about the trilateral relationship model in legislation process without any institutional construction towards interchambers relation between DPD and DPR. It will result in Judicial Review despite the involvement of DPD in phase 1 and 2 Process, since this involvement does not bind DPR and President. Sistem pemerintahan presidensial hasil revisi UUD 1945 belum tuntas karena implementasinya masih memunculkan keganjilan, Presiden (eksekutif) dalam sistem presidensial ikut mengambil keputusan untuk menghasilkan undang-undang bersama DPR, tanpa pelibatan peran DPD sebagai salah satu kamar di parlemen. Untuk memulihkan peran legislasi DPD bidang tertentu, Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 92/PUU-X/2012 menyatakan bahwa DPD berkedudukan setara dengan DPR dan Presiden dalam proses pembentukan undang-undang. Implikasi dari putusan ini DPD dilibatkan mulai dari proses perencanaan legislasi, tetapi tetap tidak dapat mengambil keputusan sekalipun untuk RUU terkait dengan kewenangannya. Putusan MK melahirkan model hubungan trilateral proses legislasi tanpa ada konstruksi secara kelembagaan terhadap hubungan interkameral antara DPR dan DPD. Hal ini akan akan berdampak pada pengujian undang-undang, walaupun DPD telah dilibatkan dalam proses tahap 1 dan tahap 2, karena pelibatan ini tidak mengikat DPR dan Presiden.

scholarly journals PENERAPAN PRESIDENTIAL THRESHOLD PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 14/PUU-XI/2013

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 72-80
Author(s):  
Liberthin Palullungan ◽  
Trifonia Sartin Ribo
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Party System ◽  
Vice President ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Presidential System ◽  
General Elections ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Impact

Indonesia is a country that implements a presidential system and a multi-party system jointly. The implementation of general elections has been regulated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. The presidential threshold is a concept used in proposing candidates for President and Vice President. Proposals are made by political parties or joining political parties by general election participants. This article analyzes the application of the presidential threshold after the Constitutional Court decision Number 114 / PUU-XI / 2013. The purpose of this writing is to determine the application of the Presidensitial threshold after the Constitutional Court decision Number 14 / PUU-XI / 013, and to determine the impact of the Constitutional Court decision number 14 / PUU-XI / 2013 on political parties. The research method used is qualitative and conceptual normative research methods. Based on this article, it is known that the application of the presidential threshold in which political parties must obtain seats 20% of the number of seats in the DPR or 25% of the valid votes nationally in the previous DPR elections, so that making new or small parties will not be able to nominate the President and Vice President themselves, but parties can form a coalition.

scholarly journals Analisis Yuridis Pembatalan Hak Untuk Melakukan Perkawinan Antara Sesama Pekerja Dalam Satu Perusahaan (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 13/PUU-XV/2017)

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-25
Author(s):  
Olivia Sitanggang
Keyword(s):  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Professional Attitude ◽  
Legal Consideration ◽  
The World ◽  
Personal Conflict ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Legal Force

Currently, there are several companies that make regulations that require the workers to resign or even be willing to be laid off if they decide to marry another worker in the company. Some of the reasons are preventing personal conflict, subjectivity, corruption, collusion and nepotism. The formulation of the problem in this research is what is the background of the provisions regarding the prohibition of marriage between fellow workers in one company, how is the analysis of the judges legal considerations in the decision Number 13 / PUU-XV / 2017, what is the impact of the Constitutional Court decision on the inclusion of clauses prohibiting intermarriage between workers.The results showed that the background of the provisions concerning the prohibition of marriage between fellow workers in one company is to maintain a professional attitude of workers when carrying out their work in order to maintain the company's existence in the world of business competition. Another reason is that it refers to Article 153 paragraph (1) letter f of Law Number 13 of 2003 so that this provision is used as a reason for employers to prohibit marital ties for fellow workers in their company. The legal consideration of the judge in decision Number 13 / PUU-XV / 2017 is clear that Article 153 paragraph (1) letter f of the Labour Laws is no longer valid, because the phrase unless it has been regulated in a work agreement, company regulation, or collective working agreement is contrary to the Constitution 1945 and has no binding legal force. The impact of the Constitutional Court's decision on the inclusion of a clause on the prohibition of marriage is that employers cannot state the reasons for dismissal of workers who have marital ties to other workers in the same office in the employment agreements, company regulations or collective working agreements, so that if the entrepreneur includes it, it is considered to have violated the decision of the Constitutional Court. Keywords: Cancellation of the Rights, Marriage, Workers, One Company.

scholarly journals DISKURSUS SOSIOLOGI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 46/PUU-VIII/2010

2021 ◽  
pp. 236-246
Author(s):  
Dwi Sakti Muhamad Huda ◽  
Dodi Alaska Ahmad Syaiful ◽  
Desi Wahyuni
Keyword(s):  
Legal Protection ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Reason ◽  
Kinship System ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Sociological Discourse ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Broad Scale

The Constitutional Court Decision Number 46 / PUU-VIII / 2010 annulled the provisions of Article 43 paragraph (1) of the Marriage Law because it contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and does not have binding legal force. The legal reason behind the rechtfinding is to emphasize that children born outside of marriage have the right to legal protection. This research was conducted with the aim of knowing the impact of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 46 / PUU-VIII / 2010 on one of the judges' judicial duties. This study uses a socio-legal approach with data collection techniques for study documents of literature materials. Based on the results of the analysis of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 46 / PUU-VIII / 2010, it does not contradict and intersect with the sociological discourse in accordance with the argumentum a contrario method. Then have coherence between the parental or bilateral kinship system with the Constitutional Court Decision No. 46 / PUU-VIII / 2010 in its application in Indonesia. This condition demands the intellectuality of Judges who are required to think on a broad scale and consider other disciplines in their legal findings.

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 IMPLIKASI HUKUM TIDAK DILAKSANAKANNYA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM PERKARA PENGUJIAN UNDANG-UNDANG

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 1089
Author(s):  
Andre Suryadinata ◽  
Toendjoeng Herning Sitaboeana
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
Rules Of Procedure

The Constitutional Court is one of the branches of judicial power that has authority to adjudicate at the first and last level whose decision is final to test the law against the Constitution as regulated in Article 24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. The final nature of  decision of the constitutional court is binding on the entire community since it was said in the Open Plenary Session. Therefore, decision of constitutional court that invalidates the validity of a law must be followed up by legislators in the cumulative list open to the national legislation program. But in practice there are 2 (two) decisions that have not been followed up, namely Constitutional Court Decision Number 31 / PUU-XI / 2013 and Constitutional Court Decision Number 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018. Based on this description, it will be examined regarding the legal implications of not implementing the Constitutional Court Decision in case of judicial review? The author examines the problem using the method of normative legal research with the statutory approach. From the results of this study, it was found that the non-follow-up of the two decisions had violated the principle of rule of law in concept of the rule of law, and caused the loss of the decision-making power, and was a form of neglect of principle of legal awareness. So it is necessary to make changes in stages of the Constitutional Court Law and the House of Representatives' Regulations on Rules of Procedure.

ZINA DAN GERAKAN LGBT: QUO VADIS KEBIJAKAN HUKUM PIDANA (PENAL POLICY) DALAM PENYELAMATAN MORALITAS BANGSA (Anotasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 26/PUUXIV/2016) / ADULTERY AND LGBT MOVEMENT: QUO VADIS PENAL POLICY FOR SAVING MORAL NATIONS (Annotation of Constitutional Court Decision Number 26/PUUXIV/2016)

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 263
Author(s):  
Jazim Hamidi ◽  
Lukman Nur Hakim
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Penal Policy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Immoral Behavior ◽  
Bisexual And Transgender ◽  
Quo Vadis ◽  
The Right ◽  
Lgbt Movement

Lesbian, Gay, Biseksual, dan Transgender sudah menjadi sebuah gerakan berbahaya, akan tetapi belum ada norma hukum yang mengatur tentang perilaku asusila tersebut, Pentingnya sanksi terhadap pelaku zina dan LGBT merupakan bentuk ketegasan negara dalam melindungi moral dan ideologi Nusantara dari faham berbahaya, akan tetapi Mahkamah Konstitusi menolak Permohonan tersebut karena pemidanaan pelaku zina, baik strafsoort maupun strafmaat, dan perilaku asusila lesbian, gay, biseksual, dan transgender memerlukan pembentukan norma baru, sehinggga menjadi Kebijakan hukum pidana (Penal policy). Kewenangan tersebut bukan merupakan kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi, akan tetapi menjadi hak Pembentuk Undang-Undang yaitu DPR bersama Presiden. Tulisan ini merupakan Anotasi atas Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 26/PUUXIV/2016 yang memberikan penjelasan kepada masyarakat adanya Quo Vadis Kebijakan hukum pidana (Penal policy) dalam putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tersebut.Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender are becoming a dangerous movement, yet there is no legal norm governing this immoral behavior. The sanctions importance towards adultery and LGBT perpetrators is a form of state assertiveness in the conservation of the moral and ideology from dangerous movement. Meanwhile, the Constitutional Court rejected the request by the argumentation which is that punishment of adultery, both strafsoort and strafmaat, and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender needs a new norm to a penal policy. The authority is not the authority of the Constitutional Court, but it is the right of the Acting Legislator, namely the House of Representatives together with the President. This paper is an Annotation of Open Law Policy of Constitutional Court Decision 26 / PUUXIV / 2016 that provides an explanation to the public about Quo Vadis of Open law policy in the Constitutional Court decision.

PERBEDAAN TAFSIR MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM MEMUTUS PERKARA PEMILIHAN UMUM SERENTAK

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suparto Suparto
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Vice President ◽  
General Election ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legislative Elections ◽  
General Elections ◽  
Legislative Election

ABSTRAKSelama ini pemilu presiden dan pemilu legislatif dilakukan secara terpisah atau tidak serentak. Pemilu legislatif selalu dilakukan sebelum pemilu presiden dan wakil presiden. Pemilihan umum yang dilakukan secara terpisah dianggap lebih banyak dampak negatifnya serta tidak sesuai dengan UUD NRI 1945. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah deskriptif analitis dengan pendekatan peraturan perundangundangan. Rumusan masalahnya adalah bagaimanakah pertimbangan hakim konstitusi dalam memutus Putusan Nomor 14/PUU-XI/2013 sehingga terjadi perbedaan dengan putusan sebelumnya Nomor 51-52-59/PUUVI/ 2008 terkait dengan pelaksanaan pemilu serentak. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pertimbangan hakim konstitusi dalam memutus Putusan Nomor 14/PUUXI/ 2013 tentang pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 2008 tentang Pemilihan Umum Presiden dan Wakil Presiden terjadi inkonsistensi. Putusan Nomor 14/ PUU-XI/2013 memutuskan bahwa pemilu presiden dan wakil presiden harus dilaksanakan secara bersamaan dengan pemilu anggota DPR, DPR, dan DPRD. Sedangkan dalam putusan sebelumnya yaitu Putusan Nomor 51-52-59/PUU-VI/2008 pada pengujian pasal dan undang-undang yang sama (Pasal 3 ayat (5) Undang- Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 2008), Mahkamah Konstitusi memutuskan bahwa pemilu presiden dan wakil presiden yang dilaksanakan setelah pemilu anggota DPR, DPD, dan DPRD (tidak serentak) adalah tidak bertentangan dengan UUD NRI 1945 (konstitusional). Terjadinya pertentangan putusan ini antara lain disebabkan oleh perbedaan pilihan penafsiran konstitusi.Kata kunci: inkonsistensi, mahkamah konstitusi, pemilu serentak. ABSTRACTDuring this time, the presidential and legislative elections are conducted separately or not simultaneously. The Legislative Elections are always carried out prior to the General Elections of the President and Vice President. The general election is conducted separately as considerably having more negative impacts and inconsistency with the 1945 Constitution. This analysis uses descriptive analysis method with the pertinent laws and regulations approach. The formulation of the issue is what the Constitutional Court Justices took into consideration in its Decision Number 14/PUU-XI/2013 leading to differences to that of its previous Decision Number 51- 52-59/PUU-VI/2008 concerning the implementation of simultaneous elections. The analysis results show inconsistencies in the consideration of the Constitutional Court Justices in ruling the case through the Decision Number 14/PUU-X/2013 on the judicial review of Law Number 42 of 2008 concerning the General Elections of the President and Vice President. The Constitutional Court Decision Number 14/PUU-X/2013 decided that the General Election of the President and Vice President should be implemented simultaneously with the Legislative Election for the Member of the House of Representatives, the Regional Representatives Council, and the Regional House of Representatives. As for the previous decision, the Constitutional Court Decision Number 51-52-59/PUU-VI/2008 on the judicial review of the same article and law (Article 3 (5) of Law Number 42 of 2008), the Constitutional Court decided that the elections of the President and Vice President conducted after the Legislative Election for the Member of the House of Representatives, the Regional Representatives Council, and the Regional House of Representatives (not simultaneously) is not contradictory to the 1945 Constitution. The contradiction of these decisions is partly due to the variety of interpretation on the constitution.Keywords: inconsistency, the constitutional court, simultaneous elections.

scholarly journals PEMAKNAAN NORMA KONSTITUSI DALAM PENGUATAN DEWAN PERWAKILAN DAERAH DALAM RULE MAKING FUNCTION

Arena Hukum ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 368-389
Author(s):  
Aditya Kartika
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Election Commission ◽  
Rule Making ◽  
Normative Aspect

The existence of the House of Representatives (DPD) in including regional inputs in the form of norms has experienced polemics. These polemics include the decisions of the State Administrative Court (PTUN), the Supreme Court (MA), and the Constitutional Court (MK) that are out of sync with one another. This decision has the impact of legal dualism which results in confusion for the General Election Commission (KPU) to carry out its functions and even disharmony between legal norms. This normative research aims to determine the existence of a basis to support the DPD in order to reduce conflicts of interest. As a result, the KPU, when viewed from the normative aspect, the Constitutional Court is the sole interpreter of the constitution because of the authority granted by the constitution in Article 24 C. If so, then the KPU does not have to worry about implementing the Constitutional Court's decision because it is constitutional. That is, the KPU carrying out the Constitutional Court's Decision means maintaining the dignity of the DPR so that the aspirations carried out truly represent the needs of the region without worrying about conflicts of interest because they have as administrators of political parties.

scholarly journals The Impact of the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018 on the Institution of the Regional Representative Council

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Al-Fatih ◽  
Mujar Ibnu Syarif ◽  
Abdul Qodir
Keyword(s):  
Court Decision ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Election Law ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Regulatory Approach ◽  
General Elections ◽  
The Impact

This study aims to determine the background of the filing of the Constitutional Court case lawsuit Number 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018 and understand the influence of the Constitutional Court decision Number 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018 on the Institutional Council of Regional Representatives. The research method used in this research is juridical normative with a statutory approach, a historical approach, and a conceptual approach obtained from data collection techniques through literature study through the statutory regulatory approach that refers to the 1945 Constitution, the Law, and the Constitutional Court Decisions. related to the theme of the discussion. The results of the study show that the background for filing a lawsuit against the Constitutional Court Decision Number 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018 is that there is no clear meaning to the phrase “other work” in Article 182 letter I of the Election Law that has provided space for political party functionaries as candidate members DPD. In addition to the impact of the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018 is the issuance of the Final List of Candidates (DCT) for DPD candidates issued by the General Elections Commission (KPU) as a follow-up to implementing the Constitutional Court Decision in which the KPU has crossed out the candidates. DPD members who still serve as functionaries of political parties.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document