scholarly journals Constitutional Complaint and the Protection of Citizens the Constitutional Rights

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
I Dewa Gede Palguna
Keyword(s):  
Public Institution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Public Official ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
Legal Remedy ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Individual Citizen ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Republic

Constitutional complaint is one of important issues to be dealt with by severral countries issues adopting constitutional court in their national legal system and the Federal Constitutional Court Germany (Bundesverfassungsgericht) is considered by expert as one of the most advance mechanism among countries in dealing with the issue. Generally speaking, constitutional complaint can be described as a complaint or lawsuit filed by an individual citizen who deems his or her constitutional right (s) has been violates by act or omission of public institution or public official. Mostly, such a complaint can only be filed it theere is no other legal remedy available or all legal remedies available have been exhausted. The Constitutional Court of The Republic of Indonesia however is not entrusted with authority to hear constitutional complaint case not withstanding the fact that statistical data on judicial review cases filed by many petitioners before the Court were substantially constitutional complaint issues. It means that, empirically giving the Court to hear constitutional complaint case is necessarily pivotal and theoritically, the Court has the very foundation to be entrusted withq such authority. Considering the complex mechanism to amend the Constitution of 1945, which exhaustively deserible the court’s authorities, this article offers the lawmaker a theoretical insight tio give the Court a limited authority to hear constitutional complaint case by the way of amending the law on Constitutional Court.

scholarly journals Modderklip Revisited: Can Courts Compel the State to Expropriate Property where the Eviction of Unlawful Occupiers is not Just and Equitable?

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Jackie Dugard
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The State ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Western Cape ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Republic

This article examines whether, to give effect to the section 26 constitutional right to adequate housing, courts can (or should) compel the state to expropriate property in instances when it is not just and equitable to evict unlawful occupiers from privately-owned land (unfeasible eviction). This question was first raised in the Modderklip case, where both the Supreme Court of Appeal (Modder East Squatters v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty) Ltd; President of the Republic of South Africa v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty) Ltd 2004 3 All SA 169 (SCA)) and Constitutional Court (President of the Republic of South Africa v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty) Ltd 2005 5 SA 3 (CC)). dodged the question, opting instead to award constitutional damages to the property owner for the long-term occupation of its property by unlawful occupiers. It is clear from cases such as Ekurhuleni Municipality v Dada 2009 4 SA 463 (SCA), that, mindful of separation of powers concerns, courts have until very recently been unwilling to order the state to expropriate property in such circumstances. At the same time, it is increasingly evident that the state has failed to fulfil its constitutional obligations to provide alternative accommodation for poor communities. In this context, this article argues that there is a growing need for the judiciary to consider, as part of its role to craft effective remedies for constitutional rights violations, the issue of judicial expropriation. It does so, first, through an analysis of the relevant jurisprudence on evictions sought by private landowners and, second, through an in-depth engagement of the recent Western Cape High Court case, Fischer v Persons Listed on Annexure X to the Notice of Motion and those Persons whose Identity are Unknown to the Applicant and who are Unlawfully Occupying or Attempting to Occupy Erf 150 (Remaining Extent) Phillipi, Cape Division, Province of the Western Cape; Stock v Persons Unlawfully Occupying Erven 145, 152, 156, 418, 3107, Phillipi & Portion 0 Farm 597, Cape Rd; Copper Moon Trading 203 (Pty) Ltd v Persons whose Identities are to the Applicant Unknown and who are Unlawfully Occupying Remainder Erf 149, Phillipi, Cape Town 2018 2 SA 228 (WCC).    

scholarly journals Constitutional Question: Alternatif Baru Pelindungan Hak Konstitusional Warga Negara Melalui Concrete Review di Indonesia (Constitutional Question: New Alternative to Protect Citizen’s Constitutional Right From Concrete Review in Indonesia)

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-148
Author(s):  
Xavier Nugraha ◽  
Ave Maria Frisa Katherina ◽  
Safira Noor Ramadhanty ◽  
Elma Putri Tanbun
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
The Law ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Court Proceedings

The authority of the Constitutional Court in the current regulations in Indonesia still does not fully protect the constitutional rights of the citizens. This is reflected by seeing that the examination that were accommodated only covered the abstract review (there were no concrete cases in the court). This condition causes the absence of legal remedies to resolve the issue of constitutionality of legal norms in the court (concrete review), even though often the issue of constitutionality of laws is precisely found in court proceedings. This research is a dogmatic legal research. The primary legal material usedis the Law of the Constitutional Court, whilst the secondary legal material consists of books, journals, and other relevant sourcesrelated to the issues discussed in this research. Based on this research, it was found that it is necessary to raise a constitutional question so that the Acts that are being examined can be annuled by the Constitutional Court and articles that are considered in contrary to the constitution cannot be used as a basis by the judge to decide related cases that being examined concretely. AbstrakWewenang Mahkamah Konstitusi yang ada dalam peraturan perundang-undangan di Indonesia saat ini masih belum melindungi hak-hak konstitusional warga negara secara penuh. Hal ini tercermin dari pengujian yang diakomodasi hanyalah melingkupi abstract review (belum adanya kasus konkrit di pengadilan). Kondisi ini menyebabkan tidak adanya upaya hukum menyelesaikan persoalan konstitusionalitas norma hukum di pengadilan (concrete review), padahal sering kali persoalan konstitusionalitas undang-undang justru ditemukan dari proses di pengadilan. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum dogmatik. Bahan hukum primer yang digunakan yaitu Undang-Undang Mahkamah Konstitusi, sedangkan bahan hukum sekunder terdiri dari buku, jurnal, dan sumber lain yang relevan dengan masalah yang dibahas dalam penelitian ini. Berdasarkan penelitian ini, ditemukan bahwa perlu diterapkannya constitutional question supaya undang-undang yang diujikan dapat dibatalkan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dan pasal yang dinilai bertentangan dengan konstitusi tersebut tidak dapat dijadikan dasar oleh hakim untuk memutus terkait kasus yang diujikan secara konkrit.

scholarly journals Konstitusionalitas dan Legalitas Norma dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang Terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar 1945

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 172
Author(s):  
Mohammad Mahrus Ali
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Republic

The Constitutionality of norms are inseparable with the model of judicial review of laws against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. It can be see  from the reviews of abstract and concrete norms by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The review of conrete norms in the decision of judicial review basically does not constitute authority of the Constitutional Court. Theoretically, norms review should be starting from abstract norms as the implications of the Constitutional Court authority. In order to review the constitutionality of laws, norms and abstract norms should be interpreted by the Constitutional Court. While concrete norms focuse more on the implementation or application of the norm itself. The application of norms cannot be separated from the legality of the norms, while constitutionality of norms is related to its coherence with with the Constitution. If the basis of norms review is the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia then abstract norms  should be the main subject matter to be reviewed. Otherwise, when concrete norms are the subject matters to be reviewed, then the implementation    of the norms that have been applied in concrete cases. This research is using normative juridical method with case approach in which 15 (fifteen) verdicts of the Constitutional Court of Republic of Indonesia over the period of 2003-2013 in judicial review of laws against the 1945 Constitution are analyzed. The focus is on the ratio decidendi of the Constitutional Court judges in determining the constitutionality     of norms. The result of this research shows that, the Constitutional Court, in the judicial review of laws against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia does not separate abstract norms and concrete norms dichotomously. In an attempt to protect the constitutional rights of citizens, the absence of legal remedies that can be further pursued by the  applicant,  as  well  as  to  provide  legal  certainty, the Constitutional Court, granted, in its decision,  the review of concrete norms.  Even though the Constitutional Court remains firm in satting that it is a concrete norms,  the applicant’s petition is granted in part which is concerning the review  the abstract norms only. Whereas, with respect to the verdict of the constitutional court that rejected the review of concrete norms, it is because the review is not on the constitutionality of norms but the application of the norms and also concerns     a petition for an interlocutory decision which is irrelevant to the subject matter of the case. The review of concrete norms in a rejecting ruling is a form of prudence   by the Constitutional Court in order not to prosecute the matters which constitute the authority the other judicial bodies, namely the Supreme Court and the lower courts. As for the ruling which declared a petition inadmissible, the Constitutional Court stated that the applicant has no legal standing and the Constitutional Court does not have the authority to test these norms. In the future the Constitutional Court needs to affirm the status of norms before further examining in depth the petition filed. In addition, the Constitutional Court should be conferred with the authority to hear constitutional complaint and constitutional question in order to create the harmonization of interpretation based on the Constitution.

scholarly journals Kebebasan Hak Ijtihad Nikah Beda Agama Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 604
Author(s):  
Faiq Tobroni
Keyword(s):  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Interfaith Marriage ◽  
The Third ◽  
Interfaith Marriages ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Marriage Laws ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Impact

This paper has three key issues. The first issue discusses the arguments constructed by applicant of judicial review (JR) to assess the constitutional rights’ violations caused by the application of Article 2 (1) UUP. The second issue discusses on how the Constitutional Court (MK) seated position of state associated marital affairs in the rejection of JR. The third issue discusses model of freedom of ijtihad (legal thought) on interfaith marriage as the impact of MK’s Decision. Based on    the discussion, regarding to the first issue, the applicant of JR assess the application of Article 2 (1) UUP has legitimized the state as the sole interpreters of religious teachings for a requirement validity of the marriage. According to the applicant,  the role is used by the state (The Office for Religious Affairs/KUA) to not accept interfaith marriage. This refusal led to the violation of some other constitutional rights. Furthermore, as the findings of the second issue, MK’s decision has placed   the real position of state not as interpreters of religious teachings, but merely to accommodate the results of religious scholars’s ijtihad regarding marriage into the state law. Thus, it is not true that the state has violated the constitutional right to more intervene the religious life of citizens. Last findings as the third issue, MK’s decision has affected the model of ijtihad freedom on interfaith marriage. Actually interfaith marriage can still be served through the Civil Registry Office (KCS). KCS could be an alternative way to facilitate the interfaith marriages for all religions in Indonesia. Special for KUA, the institution reject to record interfaith marriage.   In this way, it only accommodates freedom of ijtihad within the limits of ijtihad jama’i. KUA just accomodates ijtihad by institutions such as the Majelis Ulama Indonesia, Nahdlatul Ulama, Muhammadiyah and other similar institutions that reject interfaith marriage. Special for marriage in muslim community, ijtihad jama’i is better than ijtihad fardiy because the second could trigger the liberalization of marriage laws (temporary marriages, polygamy more than four, underage marriages and denial of recording).

Federalism Revisited: Constitutional Court Strikes Down New Immigration Act For Formal Reasons

2003 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Arndt ◽  
Rainer Nickel
Keyword(s):  
Majority Vote ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
German States ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Legislative Procedure ◽  
The Republic

On 18 December 2002, one of the major legislative projects of the Schröder Government during its first term of office from 1998 to 2002 failed when the Federal Constitutional Court delivered its judgement in the Immigration Act case. In a split decision, the Court declared the new Immigration Act, the “Gesetz zur Steuerung und Begrenzung der Zuwanderung“ (Act on the Management and Limitation of Immigration) void for formal reasons: It found that the Act did not receive a valid majority vote in the Bundesrat, the chamber of the 16 German states (Länder) that form the Republic. The Court did not have to deal with any questions related to the content of the Act. It discussed only the constitutionality of the legislative procedure.

scholarly journals Upaya Menciptakan Produk Hukum Berkualitas Konstitusi Melalui Model Preventif Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 774
Author(s):  
Muhammad Reza Maulana
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
The Law ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Constitutional Issue ◽  
Legal Product

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.

scholarly journals Menyoal Kebebasan Beragama dan Penodaan Agama Di Indonesia

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

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

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

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

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

scholarly journals Constitutional appeal – human rights protection procedure - with particular reference to the constitutional complaint in the Republic of Macedonia

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 625-638
Author(s):  
Dejan Saveski
Keyword(s):  
Negative Impact ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Republic Of Macedonia ◽  
Legal Remedy ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Primary Base ◽  
Constituent Elements ◽  
Western Democracies

In this text, the author examines the historical aspects of the constitutional complaint, analyzes the genesis of its implementation in the legal systems, first of all, the states representing Western democracies. Furthermore, it seeks to answer the question whether the constitutional complaint is properly detected as a legal remedy or a remedy. It should be borne in mind that the definitive definition arises and is ultimately determined by the position of the constitutional court in the system of state power. Special attention is paid to the attempt to implement the constitutional complaint and the legal order of the Republic of Macedonia. The author through a brief review carries out a critical analysis of the constituent elements of the constitutional complaint that the new one predicts Draft amendment to amend the Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia. Particular attention is drawn to paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Draft Amendment XXXIX from the aspect of the negative impact they perform on the position of the Constitutional Court, displacing it from the primary base with the implementation and the regular appeal.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document