scholarly journals Indonesia Constitutional Court Constitutional Interpretation Methodology (2003-2008)

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Fritz Edwadr Siregar

Nine Indonesian Constitutional Justices have the authority to annul a law drafted by 550 Parliament members and the President. The Constitutional  Court of the Republic of Indonesia (“the Court”), particularly in deciding cases  of judicial review, has the capability to declare words, sentences, paragraphs, articles or the law unconstitutional. Consequently, it is essential for the Court  to take into account legal arguments. The fundamental element of these legal arguments is constitutional interpretation, which serves as a parameter in determining constitutionality of the laws. However, in exercising its authority, the Court needs to interpret the Constitution as a  basis  for deciding  a case.  The standards for determining the constitutionality of a law must be the text of the Constitution, not what the judges would prefer the Constitution to mean. Constitutional supremacy necessarily assumes that a superior rule is what the Constitution says it is, not what the judges prefer it to be. [Craig R. Ducat: E3]. The Court period 2003–2008 were the Court’s the formative years, and as such are important to understand the methodology and interpretative approaches adopted by the Court. Many observers of the Court’s early decisions are still unsure of the overarching approach and methodology adopted by the Court. Thus, there is a need  for a close analysis and criticism of  the Court’s early decisions   to determine which methods and approaches it has adopted and whether these are appropriate in the Indonesian context. The Court has openly referred to the experiences of foreign jurisdiction in constitutional law, and therefore it would be appropriate to analyze the court’s decisions in a broader comparative context of constitutional interpretative approaches from around the  world.

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 474
Author(s):  
Elisabet . ◽  
Cut Memi

One of the authorities of the Constitutional Court governed by the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945 was the examining of laws against the contitution or judicial review. Inside the regulations which governing the implementation of this authority, the Constitutional Court only acts as a negative legislator, namely canceling or reinforcing a norm tested by the Petitioner. But in practice, the Constitutional Court has changed its role to become a positive legislator, who is forming a new legal norm, which is the authority of legislators. The Constitutional Court should not be able to form a new legal norm because there is no legal basis which regulate that. But Constitutional Court can form a new legal norm in some urgent circumstances, relating to Human Rights, and preventing legal vacuum. In addition, the establishment of laws by lawmakers that require a long process and time. This is compelling Constitutional Court to make substitute norm before the law was established by the legislators. In the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 46/PUU-XVI/2016, the Court actually wants to establish a new legal norm, but because the articles in the petitioned have criminal sanctions, and if the Constitutional Court approves the petition, the Constitutional Court has formulated a new criminal act that can only be formed by the lawmaker. Whereas in the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 21/PUU-XII/2014, the Constitutional Court established a new norm because in the article a quo there were no criminal sanctions.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 774
Author(s):  
Muhammad Reza Maulana

Pada hakikatnya judicial review dilaksanakan demi terciptanya keseimbangan hukum dan terpenuhinya hak konstitusional setiap pemangku kepentingan untuk bertindak dan mengajukan permohonan pembatalan suatu undang-undang kepada Mahkamah Konstitusi dengan menyatakan undang-undang tersebut telah bertentangan dengan UUD RI 1945. Pengujian undang-undang terhadap UUD 1945 dilakukan dalam upaya penyempurnaan hukum yang berlandaskan konstitusi. Setiap undang-undang haruslah dilandasi oleh aturan dasar yang tidak hanya tercantum pada konsiderannya saja, melainkan dibuat serta dilaksanakan berlandaskan nilai dan norma konstitusionalitas. judicial review yang selama ini dilakukan oleh banyak pihak pada Mahkamah Konstitusi membuktikan bahwa kualitas produk hukum atau aturan hukum yang selama ini dilahirkan oleh pembuat undang-undang seringkali bertolak belakang dengan keteraturan hukum, sehingga diperlukan langkah hukum preventive demi menjaga integritas lembaga pembentuk undang-undang agar tidak dianggap melahirkan produk hukum yang asal-asalan. Oleh karena itu, di dalam penelitian ini akan mengkaji dan menginisiasi pembentukan produk hukum yang berkualitas konstitusi sehingga Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagai lembaga pengawal konstitusi memberikan kontribusi dengan cita konstitusi dan melahirkan produk hukum dengan kualitas konstitusi. Dalam penelitian ini metode yang yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang dan konseptual. Hasil penelitian ini menggambarkan betapa pentingnya upaya preventive sebelum suatu aturan hukum kemudian ditetapkan, disahkan dan dilaksanakan, dimana ada persoalan konstitusionalitas terhadap implementasi suatu produk hukum yang kemudian oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dinyatakan bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945.Basically, judicial review has done to create a balance of law and to fulfill the constitutional right for every stakeholder to act and apply for application to constitutional court by stating the rule was contradicted to the constitution of Republic of Indonesia 1945. The application was made as an effort to perfect the law which is based on the constitution. Each rule has to be based on the basic rules, not only on its consideration but also is made and implemented in basic values and norms of contitutionality. Judicial review done by many people on constitutional court has proven that the quality of law product or rules of law made by the legislative often contradict with constitutional order of law, so it is necessary to take a step on preventive legal measurer to keep up the integrity of the rule maker of being judged making unqualified legal products. Therefore, this research reviews and initiates the production of law product so that the Constitutional Court can give preventive contribution on each legal products made, to be able to run with the ideals of the constitution and create legal products with constitution quality. This research used juridical normative method with legal and conceptual approaches. The results of this study illustrate how important preventive efforts before a rule of law are then set, ratified and implemented. In which there is a constitutional issue on the implementation of a legal product, that will be later declared by the Constitutional Court to be contradictory to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesian.


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-194
Author(s):  
Novianto Murthi Hantoro

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-97
Author(s):  
Dieu-Merci Ngusu Masuta

This article provides a study of the modalities and legal effects of the termination of the functions of members of the Congolese Constitutional Court. It offers a detailed analysis based mainly on the relevant provisions of Ordinance No. 16/070 of August 22, 2016 on the special status of members of the Constitutional Court. This Ordinance was adopted in application of the Congolese Constitution of February 18, 2006 in conjunction with organic-law No. 13/026 of October 15, 2013 on the organization and functioning of the Constitutional Court. Distinguishing on the one hand the normal cause of cessation of functions - the expiry of the mandate - and on the other hand the so-called exceptional causes - the resignation, dismissal and death of a member -, the study shows that the enumeration thus retained from the ordinance is incomplete with regard to the above-mentioned organic law. Thus, the list must be supplemented with the "nullity of the appointment" of a member in accordance with articles 2 and 3 of that organic law. The law is silent, however, on the issue of the voluntary retirement of members, although the implementation of this right inevitably has an impact on the end of their functions. The study therefore continues by an examination of both the general and the specific legal effects of these different modalities of ending the functions of a member of the Constitutional Court. Finally, in order to support and complete this essentially theoretical analysis, the article also looks at the question that remains most topical in Congolese constitutional law, namely the legal nature of the 'power' of the President of the Republic to appoint members of the Constitutional Court to other Courts or functions during their term of office. It concludes that such a power is not justified in the current framework of Congolese constitutional law. Indeed, it is inconceivable that such appointments should be imposed on the Constitutional Court members, their acceptance being the only exception to the principle of irremovability that governs them. Such a case should be considered one of voluntary resignation and a subsitute member should therefore only be appointed after this situation has been ascertained and established by the Constitutional Court.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 331-342
Author(s):  
Sucahyono Sucahyono

Abstract:The Constitutional Court's Decision is a product of the Judicial Review that was submitted to test the validity of the law against the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. In the implementation there are two models of the system of testing the law, namely centralized or decentralized system. Both have fundamental differences because the decentralized review system is not Erga Omnes, while the centralized system has the binding nature of Erga Omnes. The research method uses normative juridical methods, using secondary data obtained through literature study and analyzed qualitatively. The results and discussion of this research are that the Constitutional Court has provided much better direction for Indonesian legal politics, as seen from its objective decisions.Keywords: Erga Ormes, Constitutional Court, Statutory Regulations. Abstrak:Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi merupakan produk dari Judicial Review yang diajukan untuk menguji keabsahan undang-undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia. Dalam pelaksanaannya ada dua model sistem pengujian undang-undang yaitu centralized atau decentralized system. Keduanya memiliki perbedaan yang mendasar karena system desentralisasi review tidak bersifat Erga Omnes, sedang system centralized memiliki sifat mengikat Erga Omnes. Metode penelitian menggunakan metode yuridis normatif, dengan menggunakan data sekunder yang diperoleh melalui studi pustaka dan dianalisis secara kualitatif. Hasil dan diskusi dari penelitian ini adalah bahwa Mahkamah Konstitusi telah banyak memberikan arah politik hukum Indonesia yang lebih baik, terlihat dari putusan-putusannya yang bersifat objektif.Kata Kunci: Erga Ormes, Mahkamah Konstitusi, Peraturan Perundang-Undangan


2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 73
Author(s):  
Umbu Rauta ◽  
Ninon Melatyugra

Tulisan ini ingin menjawab dua isu utama mengenai hubungan hukum internasional dan pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi RI (MKRI). Isu pertama adalah legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai alat interpretasi dalam pengujian undang-undang, sedangkan isu kedua adalah urgensi penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MKRI. Tulisan ini merupakan penelitian hukum yang menggunakan pendekatan konseptual dan pendekatan historis dalam menjelaskan perkembangan pengujian undang-undang di Indonesia sekaligus menemukan legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional oleh MK RI. Kesimpulan dari tulisan ini menegaskan bahwa hukum internasional memiliki sumbangsih yang penting dalam perannya sebagai alat interpretasi dalam proses pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi, khususnya terkait hak asasi manusia. Justifikasi keabsahan praktik penggunaan hukum internasional tersebut ditarik dari tradisi ketatanegaraan yang secara implisit dikehendaki UUD NRI Tahun 1945. Manfaat positif yang diberikan hukum internasional nyatanya harus disertai juga dengan penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MK RI supaya hukum internasional dapat digunakan secara tepat. Pembahasan dalam tulisan ini dibagi ke dalam empat sub bahasan inti yakni, pengujian undang-undang, penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai the interpretative tool dalam pengujian undang-undang oleh MK, legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai the interpretative tool dalam pengujian undang-undang, pentingnya penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MK.This article intentionally answers two principal issues regarding the relationship between international law and judicial review by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The first issue is the legitimacy of international use as an interpretative tool in judicial review. The second issue talks about the necessity of urgent international law mastery by the Constitutional Court’s judges. This legal research utilizes both a conceptual approach and a historical approach to explain the development of judicial review in Indonesia, and to find legitimacy of international law by the Constitutional Court. The analysis in this article affirms that international law positively contributes as an interpretative tool in judicial review by the Constitutional Court, particularly pertaining to human rights. A justification of a legitimate international law use is withdrawn from constitutional tradition which is implicitly desired by the Indonesian Constitution (UUD NRI 1945). Since international law has provided better insights into norms, a mastery of international law should be encouraged. There are four main discussions in this article: judicial review, application of international law in judicial review process, legitimacy of international law application in judicial review, and the importance of international law mastering by Constitutional Court judges.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 080
Author(s):  
Zaka Firma Aditya

Tulisan ini hendak membahas mengenai konsistensi putusan-putusan mahkamah konstitusi dalam pengujian undang-undang berdasarkan asas preseden. MK beberapa kali dipandang tidak konsisten karena kerap mengeluarkan putusan yang bersifat overrulling. Namun, sebenarnya tidak sedikit juga putusan MK yang konsisten mengikuti preseden. Meskipun penggunaan asas preseden hanya dikenal di negara yang menganut tradisi common law, MK ternyata juga menerapkannya. Putusan MK tentang pengujian UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama adalah salah satu bentuk dianutnya asas preseden di MK. Putusan ini secara konsisten menyatakan bahwa UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama tetap konstitusional karena akan terjadi kekosongan hukum apabila UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama diputus inkonstitusional. Dalam perkara tersebut, MK mempertahankan ratio decidendinya terhadap konstitusionalnya UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama karena meskipun MK sadar bahwa UU a quo banyak mengandung kelemahan. Konsistensi standing MK terhadap UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama ini merupakan salah satu bentuk dari dipraktekannya doktrin preseden.This paper will discuss the consistency of the constitutional court decision in the judicial review cases based on the principle of precedent. MK several times deemed inconsistent because often issued a ruling that is overruling. However, there were actually a lot of MK decisions that consistently followed the precedent. Although the use of the precedent principle is only known in common law tradition, the Constitutional Court apparently also applies it. The Constitutional Court’s decision regarding the Blasphemy Prevention Act was one form of the principle of precedent in the Constitutional Court. This decision consistently states that the Blasphemy Prevention Act remains constitutional because a legal vacuum will occur if the Blasphemy Prevention Law was decided to be unconstitutional. In this case, the Court retained its ratio decidendi to the constitutionality of the Blasphemy Prevention Law, even though the Court was aware that the Law contained many weaknesses. The consistency of the Constitutional Court on the judicial review of the Blasphemy Prevention Act is one form of the practice of precedent doctrine.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-78
Author(s):  
Agsel Awanisa ◽  
Yusdianto Yusdianto ◽  
Siti Khoiriah

The purpose of this research is to determine the constitutional complaint mechanism based on comparisons in other countries, practices, and adaptation of constitutional complaints under the authority of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Many cases with constitutional complaint substance have been submitted to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia even though they don’t have this authority. This research uses a normative legal research method using a statutory approach, a conceptual approach, a comparative approach, and a case approach. This research indicates that the constitutional complaint mechanism in Germany, South Korea, and South Africa has been well implemented. In practice, cases with constitutional complaint substance are filed to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia by changing the form by using the legal means of a judicial review, such as case number 16/PUU-VI/ 2008, case number 140/PUU-XIII/2015 and case number 102/PUU-VII/2009. Due to the consideration of the structure, substance, and culture of law, adaptation of constitutional complaint within the authority of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia needs to be carried out by amending Law Number 24 of 2003 jo. Law Number 7 of 2020 concerning the Constitutional Court.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 452-474
Author(s):  
Priyo Handoko

The study aims to provide a constitutional analysis of judicial review (PK) in civil cases for more than once. The research-based is the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 108 / PUU-XIV / 2016 and No. 34 / PUU-XI / 2013 in which the two judgments provide a different classification between criminal and civil cases. The method used in this research is a normative juridical with a conceptual, legislation, and case approach. The results of the study assert that: first, the opportunity for judicial review (PK) more than once in a criminal case is an effort to uphold justice substantively by the Constitutional Court. Whereas the restriction of judicial review (PK) only once in civil cases is intended to guarantee legal certainty. Secondly, there is rational inconsistency in the arguments of the Constitutional Court which is indicated in Decision No. 108 / PUU-XIV / 2016 and No. 34 / PUU-XI / 2013. Both criminal and civil cases must seek to establish and maintain substantial justice, especially since there is a due process of law principle that requires that everyone can get the same opportunity before the law.


Jurnal Akta ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Rita Permanasari ◽  
Akhmad Khisni

ABSTRAKKetentuan Pasal 4 dan Pasal 16 ayat (1) huruf f Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris mewajibkan notaris untuk menjaga kerahasiaan segala sesuatu mengenai akta yang dibuatnya dan segala keterangan yang diperoleh guna pembuatan akta sesuai dengan sumpah janji jabatan kecuali undang-undang menentukan lain. Kemungkinan terhadap pelanggaran kewajiban tersebut berdasarkan Pasal 16 ayat (11) Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris, seorang notaris dapat dikenai sanksi berupa teguran lisan sampai dengan pemberhentian dengan tidak hormat. Terlebih lagi dengan adanya putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia dengan Nomor: 49/PUU–X/2012 memutuskan telah meniadakan atau mengakhiri kewenangan Majelis Pengawas Daerah (MPD) yang tercantum dalam Pasal 66 ayat (1) UUJN membuat notaris seakan-akan tidak ada perlindungan hukum bagi notaris dalam menjalankan tugas jabatannya. Ikatan Notaris Indonesia (INI) harus berusaha menjalankan peranan pembinaan dan perlindungan meningkatkan pengetahuan, kemampuan dan keterampilan para notaris. Demikian juga menjalin hubungan dengan para penegak hukum lainnya, agar penegak hukum lainnya yang ada hubungan dengan notaris dapat memahami kedudukan notaris sesuai UUJN.Berangkat dari pemikiran inilah kewajiban ingkar notaris masih tetap dipertahankan oleh pembuat undang-undang dalam revisi Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris Tahun 2014 yang merupakan konfigurasi kekuatan perlindungan terhadap profesi dan jabatan notaris dari sisi politik.Kata Kunci : Jabatan Notaris, Hak Ingkar, Perlindungan Hukum.ABSTRACTThe provisions of Article 4 and Article 16 paragraph (1) sub-paragraph f of the Notary's Office Law require a notary to maintain the confidentiality of all matters concerning the deeds it has made and all the information obtained for the deed in accordance with the oath of pledge of office except the law otherwise. The possibility of breach of such obligation under Article 16 paragraph (11) of Notary Law Regulation, a notary public may be subject to sanctions in the form of oral reprimands until dismissal with disrespect. Moreover, with the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia with the number : 49 /PUU-X/2012 deciding to have canceled or terminated the authority of the Regional Supervisory Board (MPD) listed in Article 66 paragraph (1) UUJN made a notary as if there was no legal protection for a notary in performing duties. The Indonesian Notary Bond (INI) should endeavor to undertake the role of guidance and protection to increase the knowledge, abilities and skills of the notaries. Likewise establish relationships with other law enforcers, so that other law enforcement who has relationship with the notary can understand the position of notary under the UUJN.Departing from this thought the obligation of notarization is still maintained by the lawmakers in the revision of the Law Regulation of Position Notary on Year 2014 which is the configuration of the strength of the protection of the profession and the notary's position from the political side.Keyword : Position of Notary, Right of Remedy, Legal Protection.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document