scholarly journals A Commentary: the Inadmissibility of Non-Indonesian Citizens in Judicial Review before the Indonesian Constitutional Court

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 208
Author(s):  
Bayu Mahendra
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Standing ◽  
Review Mechanism ◽  
Legal Consequences

The Constitutional Court of Indonesia, in its judgment No 2-3/PUU—V/2007, ruled that non-Indonesian citizens have no legal standing to file judicial review before the Court. In determining the legal standing, the Court rejected applicants’ constitutional loss which should actually serve as the substantial examination in judicial review but rather addressed this question on the basis of applicant’s citizenship. This inadmissibility ruling, however, raises question on what legal standing actually mean in the context of judicial review. This paper reviews the Court’s consideration in determining legal standing status and examines future legal consequences of such reasoning. By revisiting the substance of legal standing and judicial review derived from the 1945 Constitution, relevant Statutes, Court’s practices and case law, as well as the dissenting opinion of the judges in this case, it is found that the Court overruled the substance to procedural examination on the basis of citizenship and therefore failed to address the actual question of legal standing. This paper concludes that the Court’s reasoning has abandoned the constitutional loss as the very substance of legal standing and to which amounts to immunity of legal standing provision from a judicial review. Consequently, non-Indonesian citizens will never be recognized in judicial review mechanism before the Indonesian Constitutional Court.

scholarly journals ARTI PENTINGNYA KETERANGAN DPR DAN PRESIDEN DALAM PROSES UJI MATERI UNDANG-UNDANG

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Retno Mawarini Sukmariningsih
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Legal Fiction ◽  
Legal Standing ◽  
Legal Consequences ◽  
Law Making

<p align="center"><strong><em>Abstract</em></strong></p><p><em>In judical review, the applicant are Indonesian citizen or legal entity in legal standing.The parliament and president could be present in the court. The parliament and president statement needs in the judicial review process. Because they know about the philosophy of legislation in law making. This fact is to reflection justice, legal certainly, and utility in the Constitutional Court’s decision for all parties. Its legal consequences are: to execute the decision of the constitutional court that binds force legally. The obligation parliament is prescribed on it. Whether the accepted or rejected petition influences to the revision of legislation, based on the amended 1945 constitution, the parliament and president oblige to rivise legislation, in fact the constitutional court had the conditional verdict to declare its decision and to legalize in Indonesian gazette as legal fiction.</em></p><p align="center"><strong><em>Keyword: </em></strong><em>the important of parliament and president’s evidence, judicial review, The constitutional court.</em></p><p align="center"><strong>Abstrak</strong></p><p>Dalam Uji Materi undang-undang yang dilakukan oleh lembaga kehakiman yang disebut pemohon adalah Warga Negara Indonesia atau Badan Hukum yang memenuhi syarat <em>legal standing</em>. Sedangkan pihak yang dapat hadir dalam persidangan adalah DPR dan Presiden . Keterangan DPR dan Presiden menjadi penting dalam Uji Materi Undang-undang, karena kedual lembaga tersebut dianggap mengetahui filosofi dari pembuatan undang-undang yang sedang diuji tersebut. Keterangannya menjadi pertimbangan dalam putusan MK guna mewujudkan putusan yang mencerminkan adanya keadilan, kepastian hukum serta kemanfaatan bagi semua pihak. Konsekuensi yang harus dilakukan oleh termohon  setelah ada putusan MK adalah melaksanakan putusan MK, karena putusan MK merupakan perintah hukum yang mempunyai kekuatan hukum dan mengikat umum, kewajiban yang harus dilakukan DPR dan Presiden setelah keluarnya putusan MK adalah terlihat dalam amar putusannya tolak atau kabul sehingga akan membawa konsekuensi   termasuk revisi atau tidaknya suatu undang-undang, karena berdasarkan ketentuan UUD 1945 bahwa kewajiban untuk merevisi Undang-undang adalah badan pembuatnya yaitu DPR dan Presiden , selain kewajiban penempatan putusan MK, dan pengundangannya dalam Berita Negara.</p><p><strong>Kata Kunci : </strong>pentingnya keterangan DPR dan Presiden, uji materi, Mahkamah Konstitusi</p>

scholarly journals Execution of Fiduciary Collateral Based on the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 142
Author(s):  
Sofyan Wimbo Agung Pradnyawan ◽  
Siti Syahida Nurani ◽  
Arief Budiono ◽  
Sasongko Sasongko
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
District Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Standing ◽  
Direct Execution ◽  
Husband And Wife

The Constitutional Court responded to the existence of a debt collector who had been very unsettling by the Constitutional Court by issuing Decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019 dated January 6, 2020. Based on the request for a judicial review of Law 42/1999 submitted by husband and wife Apriliani Dewi and Suri Agung Prabowo . Apriliani is a fiduciary who experiences direct losses as a result of creditors' withdrawal of the object of fiduciary security in the form of a car. Both applicants are declared to have legal standing in submitting a request for a judicial review. The Constitutional Court granted it with Decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019. In this decision, the execution mechanism for the fiduciary guarantee object was changed by the Constitutional Court as long as it was not provided voluntarily by the debtor. Previously, the Fiduciary Law allowed creditors to execute the object of fiduciary collateral themselves, but now to carry out the execution, creditors must submit an application to the District Court. However, the implementation of direct execution by the creditor without going through the District Court can be done if the debtor admits that there is a default or default in his agreement with the creditor.

scholarly journals Constitutional principles in public administrator's decision-making under the case law of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-115
Author(s):  
Ieva Deviatnikovaitė
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Family Names ◽  
Administrative Courts ◽  
The Republic

This paper serves few purposes. First, it examines the principles of public administration in Lithuania. Good administration principle is analysed as constitutional principle relying on the case law of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania. Second, it explores impact of the decisions of Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania to the contemporary judicial review of Lithuanian administrative courts. Therefore, one of the latest rulings of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania related to the spelling of names and family names in the passports of citizens of the Republic of Lithuania will be reviewed.

Why politicians want constitutional courts: the Russian case

2004 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Thorson
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Democratic Transition ◽  
The Self ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
Soviet State ◽  
Independent Judiciary ◽  
Consolidation Phase ◽  
Review Mechanism

Why are judicial review mechanisms being incorporated into so many democratizing states? This study analyzes why politicians create an independent judicial institution with the authority to overrule their own decisions. It sheds light on the role constitutional courts play in the consolidation phase of a democratic transition, focusing on one of those countries with no tradition of independent judicial review or of democratic forms of governance—Russia. Past practices and historical precedent do not support the formation of an independent judiciary in Russia, and yet a potentially powerful constitutional court now exists. Moreover, during the course of the transition from the Soviet state to the Russian Republic, there were three attempts to create an independent judicial review mechanism only one of which could be termed a success. This analysis focuses on the self-interested calculations of politicians in forming each of these three institutions, demonstrating that political actors establish a constitutional court to enhance their democratic credibility.

scholarly journals Standing on Unsteady Ground: AREVA NP Incorporated in France v Eskom SOC LTD

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Henri-Willem Van Eetveldt
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Note ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Question ◽  
Legal Standing ◽  
Majority Judgment ◽  
Judicial Reasoning

Areva NP Incorporated in France v Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd 2017 6 BCLR 675 (CC) was a dispute over a multi-billion-rand tender. Although the majority of the Constitutional Court recognised the public importance of the case, it adjudicated the dispute entirely on a preliminary point. It found that the applicant did not have legal standing to seek the judicial review of the award of the tender. This case note has three aims. First, I will argue that the Constitutional Court's majority judgment in Areva was generally unpersuasive. Second, I will attempt to show that Areva exposes an unresolved legal question: when should a court consider the merits of a case made by a litigant with questionable standing? Third, I will propose a method for resolving this question by way of substantive judicial reasoning in any given case.     

scholarly journals HARMONISASI PERATURAN DAERAH KABUPATEN/KOTA PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 137/PUU-XIII/2015

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Roqib
Keyword(s):  
Local Government ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Research Result ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Review Mechanism ◽  
Points Of View

Constitutional Court has issued Verdict No. 137/PUU-XIII/2015 about withdrawing the Governor’s authority in cancelling regency/city regulation. The Constitutional Court has tested Article No. 251 (2), (3), (4), and (8) on the Constitution No. 23 of 2014 about Local Government. By this verdict, the only way to issue the cancellation of the regency/city regulation is through judicial review mechanism of Supreme Court (MA). Only after the Governor’s authority in cancelling the regency/city regulation has been  revoked, a problem appears in how to ensure the harmonization between the regency/city regulation and another regulation. This research uses statute approach, examining all of the constitutions with examined law issues and conceptual approach which starts from points of view and developing doctrines in science of law. Based on this research result, it is discovered that during the implementation of the Verdict of the Constutional Court No. 137/PUU-XIII/2015 did not deprive the control of central government towards local government, including the establishment of regency/city regulation. Governor as representative of central government in the region was given an authority to supervise preventively towards the establishment of regency/city regulation. By maximum preventive supervision, it would harmonize between regency/city regulation and another constitutional regulation.

scholarly journals Refleksi Konstitusionalitas Pengawasan Peraturan Daerah Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 137/PUU-XIII/2015

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 391
Author(s):  
Firdaus Firdaus
Keyword(s):  
Local Government ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Standing ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Government ◽  
And Function ◽  
The Relationship

Peraturan Daerah (Perda) sebagai produk hukum pemerintahan daerah untuk mengatur dan memerintah sendiri sebagai manifestasi otonomi, tetapi dalam praktiknya sering kali dihadapkan dengan penundaan atau pembatalan akibat fungsi pengawasan preventif atau represif oleh Pemerintah. Melalui Putusan Nomor 137/PUU-XIII/2015, Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) meneguhkan fungsi pengawasan preventif dan membatalkan fungsi pengawasan represif dengan harapan: pertama mengakhiri dilema konstitusional fungsi Pengawasan Pemerintah terhadap Perda; kedua, memperkuat otonomi daerah; dan ketiga, meneguhkan pengujian perda sebagai kompetensi Mahkamah Agung (MA). Namun hal tersebut justru menciptakan dikotomi baru, baik terkait hubungan Pemerintah Pusat dengan pemerintahan daerah maupun dalam memaknai fungsi pengawasan represif dihubungkan dengan kompetensi MA menguji peraturan perundang-undangan di bawah undang-undang terhadap undang-undang. Bentuk dikotomi baru yang dimaksud; pertama, merevitalisasi instrumen sentralisme; dan kedua mereduksi otonomi dan fungsi kekuasaan Pemerintah dengan karakteristik yang bersifat aktif, sepihak (bersegi satu) dalam mengawasi dan memastikan pelaksanaan undangundang. Dimensi konstitusional yang harus dipastikan, bahwa pelaksanaan fungsi pengawasan represif terhadap Perda memberi kedudukan hukum bagi Pemerintah Daerah otonom untuk dapat mengajukan permohonan pengujian kepada MA.Local Regulation (Perda) as a legal product of local government is to regulate and govern itself as a manifestation of autonomy. Yet, in practice it is often confronted with delays or cancellations due to the Government's preventive or repressive supervision functions. Through Decision Number 137 / PUU-XIII / 2015, the Constitutional Court (MK) affirmed the function of preventive supervision and canceled the repressive supervision function in the hope of: first, ending the constitutional dilemma of the Government Oversight function on Local Regulations; second, strengthening local autonomy; and third, confirm the perda review as Supreme Court (MA) competency. However, this actually creates a new dichotomy, both in relation to the relationship between the Central Government and the local government and in interpreting the repressive monitoring function associated with the MA competency in examining the legislation under the regulations toward the statute. The form of the new dichotomy in intended; firstly, revitalize the instrument of centralism; and secondly reducing the autonomy and function of the Government's power with active, unilateral (onesided) characteristics in supervising and ensuring the implementation of the statute. The constitutional dimension that must be ensured is that the implementation of the repressive oversight function of the Local Regulation gives a legal standing for the autonomous local Government to be able to submit an application for judicial review to the Supreme Court.

Are Russian Courts Capable of Creating Precedents? Overcoming Inconsistency in Case Law

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 341-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirill Koroteev
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Judicial Decisionmaking ◽  
Short Period ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
Russian Law

This article discusses the issue of the consistency of judicial decisions in two of Russia’s highest courts: the Supreme Court and the Higher Arbitrazh Court. The President of the latter has been especially vocal in advocating for the “introduction of the doctrine of precedent into Russian law”. This idea, understood as the power to bind lower courts by judgments in individual cases, has even received support from the RF Constitutional Court. However, this article stresses that before discussing whether there may—or may not—be a place for judicial precedent in Russia, the judgments of the two highest courts must be consistent. We examine one particular issue that lends itself to a number of possible solutions: the judicial review of internal circulars from federal bodies of executive power. The case law of the two courts has been marked by U-turns in dealing with this matter. They sometimes have issued completely different judgments in similar cases over a short period of time, while failing to explain why their rulings differ from earlier judgments. The author of the present article argues that this inconsistency gives witness to a number of fundamental flaws in judicial decisionmaking in Russia and undermines any discourse in support of precedent in Russia.

scholarly journals Karakteristik Judicial Order dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dengan Amar Tidak Dapat Diterima

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 883
Author(s):  
Intan Permata Putri ◽  
Mohammad Mahrus Ali
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Collection Method ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Legal Consequences

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam pengujian undang-undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 (UUD NRI 1945) dengan amar tidak dapat diterima atau niet ontvankelijke verklaard (NO) pada umumnya tidak memiliki pertimbangan hukum. Akan tetapi dalam perkembangannya MK memberikan pertimbangan hukum baik mengenai pokok perkara dan kedudukan hukum Pemohon. Penelitian ini hendak menjawab dua permasalahan yaitu; apa urgensi adanya pertimbangan hukum yang mengandung judicial order dalam putusan dengan amar tidak dapat diterima? Kemudian bagaimana karakteristik judicial order dalam putusan dengan amar tidak dapat diterima? Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif dengan metode pengumpulan data melalui studi pustaka. Penelitian ini mengelompokkan putusan yang memiliki amar NO dari tahun 2003 sampai dengan 2018 yang berjumlah 375 putusan. Dari jumlah tersebut, putusan NO yang memiliki pertimbangan hukum sebanyak 71 putusan. Penelitian ini menemukan 3 putusan yang didalam pertimbangan hukumnya terdapat judicial order yakni Putusan 105/PUU-XIV/2016, Putusan 57/PUU-XV/2017, dan Putusan 98/PUU-XVI/2018. Simpulan dari penelitian ini adalah putusan dengan amar Tidak Dapat Diterima yang memuat judicial order selalu berkaitan dengan implementasi putusan yang tidak berjalan sebagaimana mestinya. MK menegaskan kembali sifat final dan binding Putusan MK serta sifat putusan MK yang declatoir konstitutif melalui putusan a quo. Karakteristik judicial order dalam ketiga a quo adalah ketika MK memberikan peringatan konstitusional secara bertahap (gradual). Pada Putusan 105/PUU-XIV/2016 MK menegaskan bahwa pengabaian putusan MK merupakan perbuatan melawan hukum, selanjutnya pada putusan 57/PUU-XV/2017 MK tegaskan sifat putusan yang self executing dan yang paling mendasar adalah pada putusan 98/PUU-XVI/2018 yang menyatakan bahwa lembaga atau masyarakat yang tidak menjalankan putusan MK merupakan pembangkangan terhadap konstitusi. Lahirnya pertimbangan tersebut sebagai ikhtiar menegakkan supremasi konstitusi dan marwah Mahkamah Konstitusi.Decisions of the Constitutional Court in judicial review of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (1945 Constitution) with an unacceptable verdict or niet ontvankelijke verklaard (NO) generally do not have legal considerations. However, in its development the Court gave legal considerations both on the subject matter and legal position of the Petitioner. This research wants to answer why is the Constitutional Court gives judgment (judicial order) to the case with the unacceptable verdict? What are the legal consequences of legal considerations in the unacceptable verdict on compliance with the Constitutional Court's decision? This research is a normative legal research with data collection method through literature study. This study grouped the decisions that had NO verdicts from 2003 to 2018 totaling 375 decisions. From all of those, NO verdicts that have legal considerations are 71. This study found 3 decisions that have judicial orders in their legal considerations namely Decision 105/PUU-XIV/2016, Decision 57/PUU-XV/2017, and Decision 98/PUU-XVI/2018. The conclusion of this research is that an unacceptable verdict that contains a judicial order is always related to the implementation of a decision that does not work as it should. The Court reaffirmed the final and binding character of the Constitutional Court's decision as well as the character of the Constitutional Court's decision which declared constitutive through a quo decision. The characteristic of judicial order in the three a quo is when the Constitutional Court gives a gradual constitutional warning. In Decision 105/PUU-XIV/2016 the Constitutional Court confirmed that the disregard for the Constitutional Court's decision was an act against the law, then in the decision 57/PUU-XV/2017 the Constitutional Court affirmed the character of the decision that was self-executing and the most basic was the decision 98/PUU-XVI/2018 which states that an institution or community that does not carry out the Constitutional Court's decision is a defiance of the constitution. The birth of these considerations is as an effort to uphold the supremacy of the constitution and the spirit of the Constitutional Court. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document