scholarly journals Perluasan Kewenangan Pengawasan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Republik Indonesia Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945

2020 ◽  
pp. 31-53
Author(s):  
Hananto Widodo
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Court Ruling ◽  
Independent State ◽  
Historical Approach ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Government Functions ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Election Commission

In general, there are at least 3 functions of the people's representative body. First, the function of legislation. Second, the supervisory function. Third, the budget function. This type of research used in this study is normative research. By using a statutory, conceptual and historical approach. The authority of the DPR's oversight before and after the amendment to the 1945 Constitution does not only lie in the regulation, where before the change is stipulated in the explanation and after the amendment to the 1945 Constitution is regulated in the Articles of the Constitution, but there is an expansion of the intended subject. In the 1945 Constitution prior to the amendment, the supervision of the House of Representatives was only addressed to the President whereas after the amendment to the 1945 Constitution the supervision of the House of Representatives was not only addressed to the President, but to all agencies or officials who carried out Government functions. The authority of the House of Representatives in conducting oversight becomes wider after the issuance of the Constitutional Court ruling No. 36 / PUU-XV / 2017, because independent state institutions, such as the Corruption Eradication Commission and the Election Commission can be subject to oversight by the House of Representatives.

scholarly journals KEDUDUKAN KOMISI PEMBERANTASAN KORUPSI DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN INDONESIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 163
Author(s):  
Mahesa Rannie
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
State Institution ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Independent State ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Law ◽  
Constitutional System ◽  
The Right

Abstrak Kedudukan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) dalam sistem ketatanegaraan Indonesia memang seringkali diperdebatkan, hal ini terbukti dengan Putusan-Putusan MK yang berubah-ubah. Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam putusannya pernah beberapa kali memutuskan berbeda tentang kedudukan KPK ini dalam sistem ketatanegaraan Indonesia. Mahkamah Konstitusi pernah memutuskan KPK merupakan lembaga negara independen di luar ranah kekuasaan eksekutif, legislatif, dan yudikatif. Pernah pula memutuskan bahwa KPK merupakan eksekutif dilihat dari kewenangannya. Putusan-putusan MK ini tentu saja membawa pengaruh terhadap undang-undang KPK. Revisi undang-undang KPK terbaru, yaitu Undang-Undang Nomor 19 Tahun 2019 menyatakan KPK masuk dalam ranah kekuasaan eksekutif sehingga dengan demikian KPK dapat menjadi objek hak angket Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR). Hal demikian tentu saja menambah panjang perdebatan di kalangan ahli hukum dengan argumentasinya masing-masing. Dari argumentasi-argumentasi tersebut penulis menganggap KPK adalah lembaga negara independen di luar struktur organ negara yang utama. Hal ini sejalan dengan theory the new separation of power sebagai konsekuensi dari teori negara kesejahteraan (welfare state) di era abad modern ini. Sebagai lembaga negara independen yang kedudukannya tidak sekuat lembaga negara utama dalam ranah kekuasaan eksekutif, legislatif, dan yudikatif tentu saja KPK bisa dibubarkan jika lembaga yang selama ini sebetulnya mempunyai wewenang kuat untuk melaksanakan penegakan hukum dalam rangka pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi (Kepolisian dan Kejaksaan) mampu berbenah diri. Selama belum mampu berbenah maka wewenang tersebut bisa dilaksanakan oleh KPK yang keberadaannya sampai saat ini masih tetap diperlukan dalam rangka pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi di Indonesia. Kata kunci: Kedudukan KPK, Sistem Ketatanegaraan, Indonesia Abstract The position of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in the constitutional system of Indonesia is often debated. This is evidenced by the inconsistent decisions of the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court has ever made different decisions several times regarding the position of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in the constitutional system of Indonesia. The Constitutional Court once decided that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) was an independent state institution outside the realm of executive, legislative and judicial powers. It has also decided that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is an executive body in terms of its authority. These inconsistent decisions of the Constitutional Court, of course, have an influence on the law of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). The latest revision of the law of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), namely the Law Number 19 of 2019 states that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is classified to be in the realm of executive power so that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) can become the object of the right to inquiry by the House of Representatives (DPR). This situation, of course, adds to the length of debate among legal experts with their respective arguments. Based on these arguments, the writer considers that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is an independent state institution outside the main state organ structure. This is in line with the theory of the new separation of power as a consequence of the theory of the welfare state in this modern era. As an independent state institution whose position is not as strong as the main state institutions in the realm of executive, legislative and judicial powers, of course, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) can be dissolved if the institutions that actually have strong authority to carry out law enforcement in the context of eradicating criminal acts of corruption (Police and Prosecutors) are able to empower themselves to execute their authority. However, if those institutions have not been able to execute their authority, this authority can be exercised by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), whose existence is still needed in the context of eradicating criminal acts of corruption in Indonesia.

scholarly journals PERAN KOMISI YUDISIAL DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN INDONESIA

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Ujang Bahar
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
State Institution ◽  
Independent State ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
State Audit ◽  
Judicial Authority ◽  
Constitutional System ◽  
Selection Of

The Judicial Commission (JC) is a new independent state institution established as a product of the reform in the constitutional system and its existence is confirmed in the 1945 Constitution. The Judicial Commission was established following the idea of a one-roof system in the judicial authority. Among the roles and authority of the Judicial Commission are to propose appointment of the Supreme Court justices to the House of Representatives (DPR) and to supervise the conducts of justices/judges in order to maintain their respect, dignity and honor and good conduct.  However, in the performance of its duties, the Judicial Commission is not yet as independent as it has been expected. It can be seen from its limited authority. In supervising the conduct of the judges/justices, the Commission is not authorized to impose any sanctions and in the process of selection of candidates for the Supreme Court justices, its authority is limited only at the ratio 3:1. Therefore, the existence of the Commission under the 1945 Constitution becomes unclear, since it is placed under the chapter of the judicial authority, but in reality it does not exercise its judicial authority and only functions as a supervisory agency like the State Audit Board (BPK) instead. Consequently, the Commission only serves as the supporting institution to the Supreme Court, President and the House of Representatives. In order that the Commission becomes truly independent as an institution which supervises the implementation of the judicial power sitting at an equal level with other state institutions, it is necessary to strengthen the institution by making amendments (to re-determine the position of the Judicial Commission) in the 1945 Constitution and other relevant laws and regulations.

scholarly journals KAJIAN YURIDIS TERHADAP PENEGASAN HIEARAKI PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN DI INDONESIA DALAM PERSPEKTIF STUFEN THEORIE

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 95
Author(s):  
Muhammad Yusrizal Adi Syaputra
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Uncertainty

Rule lower against the rules of higher then lower regulation it can test the material (judicial review) to be canceled entirely or partially canceled. The assertion of hierarchy intended to prevent overlap between legislation that could give rise to legal uncertainty. Position regulations set by the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) House of Representatives (DPR), the Regional Representatives Council (DPD), the Supreme Court (MA), the Constitutional Court (MK), the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK), Commission Judicial (KY) , Bank Indonesia (BI), the Minister, the Agency, Organization, or commissions, in the Indonesian legal system recognized by Act No. 12 of 2011 either were born because of higher regulatory mandate and within the scope and authority of the minister. Thus, no doubt that the regulations set by state institutions, have binding force that must be obeyed by the parties set forth therein. While the Regulations issued policy also recognized as an Freies Ermessen in the execution of its duties and functions.<br /><br />

scholarly journals POLITIK HUKUM KEWENANGAN KONSTITUSIONAL DEWAN PERWAKILAN DAERAH DALAM PROSES LEGISLASI PASCA PUTUSAN MK NOMOR 92/PUU-X/2012

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 365
Author(s):  
Anna Triningsih
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
State Institution ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Historical Approach ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Laws And Regulations

<p>Undang-Undang Nomor 17 Tahun 2014 tentang Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah, Dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah (UU MD3) pasca putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) dinilai memiliki problem substantif/materil akibat materi muatannya bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 (UUD NRI 1945), yang mengakibatkan kerugian konstitusional terhadap Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPD), meliputi dikuranginya kewenangan DPD untuk dapat mengajukan (Rancangan Undang-Undang) RUU, dikuranginya kewenangan DPD untuk membahas RUU dan dikuranginya kewenangan DPD dalam kedudukannya sebagai lembaga perwakilan daerah. Hal ini menunjukan bahwa pembentukan UU MD3 nyata-nyata tidak menghormati putusan MK yang diberi mandat UUD NRI 1945 sebagai lembaga penafsir dan penjaga konstitusi, dengan tidak menghormati, mematuhi, dan melaksanakan putusan MK ini menunjukkan ketidakpatuhan terhadap putusan lembaga negara yang telah ditunjuk konstitusi untuk mengawal kemurnian pelaksanaan konstitusi. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode normatif menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan ( statute approach ), pendekatan konsep ( conceptual approach ), dan pendekatan historis ( historical approach ). Ketidaktaatan penyusunan UU MD3 pada putusan MK merupakan pengingkaran UUD NRI 1945 dan perkembangan ini merupakan langkah mundur reformasi. Pembentuk Undang-Undang, dalam hal ini, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR) dan Presiden harus segera melakukan perubahan UU Nomor 12 Tahun 2011 tentang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-undangan dengan berpijak pada rambu-rambu konstitusional Putusan MK Nomor 92/PUU-X/2012.</p><p>Law Number 17 Year 2014 on the People’s Consultative Assembly, House of Representatives, Regional Representatives Council, and the Regional House of Representatives (MD3 Law) after the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) is considered to have a substantive problem due to the substance that is contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (the 1945 Constitution), which resulted in the constitutional loss of Regional Representatives Council (DPD), including the reduction of DPD authority to propose draft bills, to discuss draft bills and the reduction in its authority as the regional representative institution. This shows that the drafting of MD3 Law is obviously not respecting the decision of the Court that is mandated by the 1945 Constitution as the interpreter and guardian institution of the constitutional, by not respecting, obeying and implementing MK’s decision which indicates non-compliance with the decision of the state institution that has been designated to guard the purity of the constitution implementation of the constitution. This study uses normative method with statute approach, conceptual approach and a historical approach. The noncompliance of the drafting of MD3 Law towards the MK’s decision is a denial of MK and this development is a step back of Reformation. The legislators, in this case, the House of Representatives (DPR) and the President should immediately amend the Law Number 12 Year 2011 on the Establishment of Laws and Regulations based on the MK’s Decision No. 92/PUU-X/2012. </p>

scholarly journals ANALISIS YURIDIS CABANG PEMERINTAHAN KEEMPAT DALAM STRUKTUR KETATANEGARAAN DI INDONESIA

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 19
Author(s):  
Tri Suhendra Arbani
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
State System ◽  
Modern State ◽  
Independent State ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Government Functions ◽  
State Commission ◽  
New Institutions ◽  
Constitutional System ◽  
State Body

AbstractThe development of the modern state system is also followed by the establishment of new institutions as a support of the institutions that have been there before. The most significant event in the development and establishment of institutions is the new power branch, which is called by the experts in constitutional as an independent state commission. Independent state commission institution which, if seen from the character and the authority, the agency in some literature in American constitutional law is referred to as the fourth branch of power (The Fourth Branch of Government). Some things that make this institution called the fourth branch of government (The Fourth Branch of Government) is the fact that the agency, or commission or the state body run more than one function of government as well. The existence of a fourth branch of government (The Fourth Branch of Government) with the characteristics of state institutions whose authorities are quasi, combinations, as well as the accumulation of three existing government functions and make this institution to be difficult to identify in thought Trias Politica. The phenomenon of the rise of an institution with a new concept that has influenced the constitutional system in many countries.AbstrakPerkembangan sistem ketatanegaaran modern dikuti pula dengan terbentuknya lembaga-lembaga baru sebagai penunjang dari lembaga yang telah ada sebelumnya. Hal yang paling signifikan dalam perkembangan dan pembentukan institusi domokratis tersebut tidak lain adalah cabang kekuasaan baru yang biasa disebut oleh kalangan ahli tata negara sebagai komisi negara independen.  Lembaga komisi negara independen yang jika dilihat dari sifat dan kewengannya, lembaga tersebut dalam beberapa literatur hukum tata negara di Amerika disebut sebagai cabang kekuasaan keempat (The Fourth Branch of Goverment). Beberapa hal yang membuat lembaga negara ini disebut sebagai cabang pemerintahan keempat (The Fourth Branch of Government) adalah fakta bahwa lembaga, atau komisi atau badan negara tersebut menjalankan lebih dari satu bahkan ketiga fungsi pemerintahan sekaligus. Eksistensi cabang pemerintahan keempat (The Fourth Branch of Government) dengan karakteristik lembaga negara yang kewenangannya yang bersifat kuasi, kombinasi, maupun akumulasi dari tiga fungsi pemerintahan yang ada dan menjadikan lembaga ini untuk sulit diidentifikasi dalam pemikiran Trias Politica. Fenomena munculnya sebuah lembaga dengan konsep baru tersebut telah ikut mempengaruhi sistem ketatanegaraan dibanyak negara.

scholarly journals Analysis of Reduction of Authority of The Constitutional Court Through The Law on General Election

2018 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 01001
Author(s):  
Budiman N.P.D Sinaga ◽  
Sahat H.M.T Sinaga
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Vice President ◽  
General Election ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
General Elections ◽  
The Law ◽  
Election Results ◽  
The Republic

In the 1945 Constitution of the Republic Indonesia, there is an order to further regulate in the Law such as the general election that has been enacted Law No. 7/ 2017 on General Election. In its Law, the results of the general election is merely a dispute over the result of the general election regarding the determination of the vote which may affect the election participants’ seats and the President and Vice President election results. The objective of this paper is to find out the legal consequences of the provisions of the law which reduce the authority of state institutions that have been regulated in the 1945 Constitution. The approach of this research is status approach that will be used by examining the laws and regulations relating to the problem. The provisions of the Law on General Elections can be said to have reduced the authority of the Constitutional Court granted the Constitution. There should be strong grounds for an amendment to this provision it can be done immediately by the House of Representatives and the President. Testing by the Constitutional Court may be done but it is better through changes by the House of Representatives and the President.

scholarly journals Article 24C Paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia: History and Critical Analysis of Disputes on the Authority of State Institutions

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 403-412
Author(s):  
Demas Brian W ◽  
Sudarsono ◽  
Rachmad Safa’at ◽  
Muchamad Ali Safa’at
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
State Institution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Independent State ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
General Elections ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Executive Agency ◽  
State Requirement

In simple terms, the ratio legis can be interpreted as the reason why there is a provision in the law. Article 24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia determines the authority possessed by the Constitutional Court, paragraph (1) reads: The Constitutional Court has the authority to adjudicate at the first and final levels whose decisions are final to examine laws against the Constitution, decide disputes over authority a state institution whose authority is granted by the Constitution, decides on the dissolution of political parties, and decides on disputes regarding the results of general elections. The limiting provisions of Article 24C paragraph (1) seem to close the scope for expanding the Constitutional Court authority to decide disputes over the authority of independent state institutions. Meanwhile, this is a state requirement. This research uses a statutory approach with a descriptive analysis method. The conclusions obtained are: 1) it is not possible that a state institution that has supervisory authority has conflict with other legal institutions; 2) there are state institutions whose authorities are regulated by law and have the potential for authority disputes, but are resolved through the executive agency; 3) there is the authority of state institutions that have the potential for conflict of authority but there are no rules for resolving them.  

scholarly journals Penyelesaian Sengketa Kewenangan Lembaga Negara Independen di Indonesia

SASI ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 434
Author(s):  
Kelik Iswandi ◽  
Nanik Prasetyoningsih
Keyword(s):  
Research Method ◽  
Analytical Data ◽  
Data Use ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Independent State ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Library Research

Competence dispute which involves independent state organs occur several times in Indonesia has an impact on obstruction of competence. Several cases of competence dispute which involve independent state organ have been submitted to the Constitutional Court but not all have been granted. This study aims to examined the concern of competence dispute which involves independent state organ and factors of independent state organ can fulfill the subjectum litis criteria of SKLN in Constitutional Court. The research method is normative by using primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, collected from library research. This research analytical data use the statute approach and case approach. The results of this study indicate that the authority of the Constitutional Court does not specifically regulate state institutions that can be subjectum Litis SKLN in the Constitutional Court, there is a gap accommodated by the Constitutional Court in several decisions.

scholarly journals KEDUDUKAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI SEBAGAI LEMBAGA NEGARA BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG DASAR 1945

Solusi ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 94-105
Author(s):  
Johansyah Johansyah
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Vice President ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Election Results ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

The Constitutional Court is the executive branch of the judiciary that is independent and separate from other branches of power, namely the government (executive) and legislative institutions. The Constitutional Court as a first and last level judiciary does not have an organizational structure as large as the Supreme Court which is the peak of a judicial system whose structure is vertically and horizontally covers five judicial environments, namely the general court environment, the state administrative court environment, the religious court environment, and military court environment. As an organ of judicial power that operates the judicial function, the Constitutional Court is independent, both structurally and functionally. The functions and authorities of the Constitutional Court based on Law No. 24 of 2003, namely the Constitutional Court has the authority to hear: Test the laws against the Republic of Indonesia 1945 Constitution; Decide on authority disputes between state institutions whose authority is granted by the Republic of Indonesia 1945 Constitution; Decide the dissolution of political parties; Decide disputes about election results; Give a verdict on the opinion of the House of Representatives that the President and / or Vice-President are suspected of violating the law in the form of treason, corruption, bribery, other serious crimes, or despicable acts, or no longer fulfill the conditions as President and or Vice President, as intended in the Republic of Indonesia 1945 Constitution.

scholarly journals Relevansi Putusan Uji Materi oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi terhadap Sistem Checks and Balances dalam Pembentukan Undang-Undang

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 353-379
Author(s):  
Despan Heryansyah ◽  
Harry Setya Nugraha
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Republic

This article discusses the relevance of the judicial review decision by the Constitutional Court to the checks and balances system in law legislation in Indonesia. In the framework of checks and balances between state institutions, the existence of the authority of the Constitutional Court to examine laws against the Constitution can be seen as a limitation for the legislators. This is because the discretion of legislators, namely the President and the House of Representatives, in carrying out the legislation function can be limited by the interpretation of the Constitution carried out by the Constitutional Court. This article concludes, the checks and balances mechanism regulated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia is realized with the principle of power limited by power. Therefore, the authority and decision of the judicial review by the Constitutional Court is not an intervention on the authority of lawmakers so that it isi assumed to pass the checks and belances principle. The authority and decision of the judicial review by the Constitutional Court actually confirms the manifestation of the principle of power limited by power and affirming the supremacy of the Constitution. Thus, the principle of supremacy of the Constitution in the context of the rule of law places the Constitution as the highest law. Abstrak Artikel ini membahas relevansi putusan uji materi oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi terhadap sistem checks and balances dalam pembentukan hukum berupa undang-undang di Indonesia. Dalam kerangka checks and balances antar lembaga negara, adanya kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi menguji undang-undang terhadap Konstitusi dapat dipandang sebagai suatu pembatasan bagi pembentuk undang-undang. Sebab, keleluasaan pembentuk undang-undang, yaitu Presiden dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, dalam menjalankan fungsi legislasi bisa dibatasi oleh adanya tafsir Konstitusi yang dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi. Artikel ini menyimpulkan, mekanisme checks and balances yang diatur dalam Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 diwujudkan dengan prinsip kekuasaan dibatasi oleh kekuasaan. Karena itu, kewenangan dan putusan uji materi oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi bukanlah wujud intervensi terhadap kewenangan pembentuk undang-undang dan melampaui prinsip checks and balances. Kewenangan dan putusan uji materi oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi justru menegaskan wujud dari prinsip kekuasaan dibatasi kekuasaan dan meneguhkan supremasi Konstitusi. Demikianlah, prinsip supremasi Konstitusi dalam konteks negara hukum yang menempatkan Konstitusi sebagai hukum tertinggi.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document