scholarly journals Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 85/PUU-XIV/2016 terhadap Praktek Persekongkolan Tender

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 369
Author(s):  
Titis Anindyajati
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
The Law

Pada pokoknya, persekongkolan tender merupakan salah satu bentuk persekongkolan yang dilarang UU Nomor 5/1999 tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat dan juga menjadi perkara yang paling sering diproses KPPU. Namun baik secara teoritis maupun praktik menimbulkan permasalahan yaitu karena adanya pemaknaan yang bias akan frasa “pihak lain” dalam Pasal 22 UU Nomor 5/1999. Hal inilah yang melatarbelakangi adanya pengujian Pasal 22 ke MK. Dalam penulisan ini yang dibahas yaitu bagaimana pengaturan persekongkolan tender menurut peraturan perundang-undangan, bagaimanakah implikasi yuridis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 85/PUU-XIV/2016 tentang pengujian Pasal 22 UU Nomor 5/1999 serta bagaimana analisis hukum terhadap pertimbangan hukum Putusan MK tersebut. Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian yuridis normatif dimana obyek penelitian ini adalah peraturan perundang-undangan dan Putusan MK. Dalam hal ini Penulis menyimpulkan, yaitu, Pertama, persekongkolan tender yang merupakan suatu bentuk kerja sama antara dua pihak atau lebih untuk menguasai pasar yang bersangkutan dan/atau memenangkan peserta tender yang mengakibatkan terjadinya persaingan usaha tidak sehat diatur secara eksplisit dalam Pasal 1 angka 8 dan Pasal 22 UU Nomor 5/1999 serta Peraturan KPPU Nomor 2/2010, Kedua, Implikasi yuridis Putusan MK Nomor 85/PUU-XIV/2016 bermanfaat untuk menjamin kepastian hukum dan keadilan bagi para pihak seperti pengusaha utamanya masyarakat. Untuk itu, perlu adanya harmonisasi antara satu peraturan dengan peraturan lainnya, pengujian UU terhadap UUD terkait pengaturan persekongkolan tender dalam persaingan usaha tidak sehat ataupun revisi terhadap UU Nomor 5/1999.Principally, tender conspiracy is one form of conspiracy that subjected by the Law No. 5/1999 on The Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition, and also as a type of case that frequently occurred and processed by the KPPU. However, in theory, and in practice, there are some issues that plague the regulation, because of the occurrence of bias and unclear interpretation of the phrases “other parties” contained in Article 22 of Law 5/1999. This interpretation issue then became the background in the petition for review of Article 22 to the Constitutional Court. This paper mainly discussed the regulation of tender conspiracy according to the existing Law, and also to study the juridical implications of Constitutional Court Decision Number 85/PUU-XIV/2016 concerning the review of Article 22 Law 5/1999. This paper also delves into the legal analysis of the court considered in the aforementioned Decision. This paper utilized the means of normative juridical research methodology, with the existing regulations and Constitutional Court Decision as the object of research. In the paper, the writer concludes that, first, tender conspiracy is a form of cooperation between one party or more to control particular market and/or to determine the awardees of tenders which may cause unfair business competition explicitly regulated in Article 1 number 8 and Article 22 Law 5/1999 and also the KPPU Regulation Number 2/2010, second, the juridical implications of Constitutional Court Decision Number 85/PUU-XIV/2016 was necessary in order to guarantee the equitable legal certainty and fairness toward all parties especially business practising citizens. Thus, there is a necessity to achieve harmony among these regulations, which can be obtained through the judicial review of laws against the Constitution concerning the regulations of tender conspiracy and by means of legislative revision toward Law 5/1999.

scholarly journals KONSTITUSIONALITAS MATERIELE WEDERRECHTELIJK DALAM KEBIJAKAN PEMBERANTASAN TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 131
Author(s):  
Ade Adhari
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
The Law ◽  
Principle Of Legality ◽  
Laws And Regulations

ABSTRAKPutusan Nomor 003/PUU-IV/2006 menyatakan materiele wederrechtelijk dalam Undang-Undang Tindak Pidana Korupsi bertentangan dengan Pasal 28D ayat (1) UUD NRI 1945, dan tidak berlaku mengikat. Penelitian ini berupaya memahami apakah tepat atau tidak pertimbangan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam putusan tersebut. Dalam menjawab permasalahan tersebut digunakan penelitian doktrinal, norma hukum serta asas yang melandasi lahirnya putusan tersebut. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian diketahui terdapat ketidaktepatan dalam pertimbangan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Mahkamah Konstitusi telah keliru dalam usahanya memvalidasi Penjelasan Pasal 2 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Tindak Pidana Korupsi dengan menguji berdasarkan asas legalitas yang terdapat dalam Pasal 1 ayat (1) KUHP. Padahal prinsipnya pengujian yang dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi adalah menguji undang-undang terhadap UUD NRI 1945. Selain itu, Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi berorientasi pada asas legalitas yang hanya mengutamakan rechtssicherheit dan mengesampingkan keberadaan gerechtigkeit dan zweckmässigkeit. Lebih dari itu, tidak diakuinya materiele wederrechtelijk telah meniadakan eksistensi hukum yang hidup di masyarakat sebagai sumber hukum untuk menyatakan suatu perbuatan bersifat melawan hukum. Hal ini bertentangan dengan mandat Pasal 18B ayat (2) UUD NRI 1945, dan berbagai peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku. Dengan demikian materiele wederrechtelijk tidak bertentangan dengan kontitusi.Kata kunci: materiele wederrechtelijk, korupsi, konstitusionalitas. ABSTRACT Constitutional Court Decision Number 003/PUUIV/2006 states unlawful criminal acts (materiele wederrechtelijk) in the Anti-Corruption Law is inconsistent with Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, and not binding. Doctrinal research, legal norms and principles underlying the birth of the court decision are used in answering whether the problem arising from the decision is justified. Based on the result of the research, there is an inaccuracy in the consideration of the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court has erred in its attempt to validate the Elucidation of Article 2 Paragraph (1) of Corruption Law by examining based on the legality principle contained in Article 1 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code. Whereas in principle, what has been conducted by the Constitutional Court is a judicial review of the law against the 1945 Constitution. In addition, the Constitutional Court’s decision is oriented on the principle of legality which only prioritizes legal  certainty (Rechtssicherheit) and overrides justice (Gerechtigkeit) and utility (Zweckmässigkeit). Moreover, the unrecognized materiele wederrechtelijk has negated the existence of a living law in society as a source of law to declare unlawful acts. This is contrary to the mandate of Article 18B paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution and various prevailing laws and regulations. Thus, the material wederrechtelijk is not contradictory to the constitution. Keywords: materiele wederrechtelijk, corruption, constitutionality.

scholarly journals Judicial Consistency dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Penodaan Agama

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 080
Author(s):  
Zaka Firma Aditya
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Prevention Act ◽  
Ratio Decidendi ◽  
The Law ◽  
Prevention Law

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.

scholarly journals Mengukur Konstitusionalitas Peninjauan Kembali (PK) Kedua dalam Perkara Perdata

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 452-474
Author(s):  
Priyo Handoko
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Due Process Of Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Civil Cases ◽  
Constitutional Analysis

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.

scholarly journals Legal Examination of the Constitutional Court Number 28/PUU-XI/2013 Concerning the Case of Judicial Review of Law Number 17 of 2012 Concerning Cooperatives

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 42
Author(s):  
Lauddin Marsuni ◽  
Salle Salle ◽  
Syarifuddin Syarifuddin ◽  
La Ode Husen
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Technical Analysis ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Normative Approach ◽  
Natural Person ◽  
Analysis Methods ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Force

This study aims to understand the legal review on Decision of the Constitutional Court No. 28/PUU-XI/2013 on the review of Law No. 17 of 2012 on Cooperatives against The 1945 Constitution. The benefits of this research are socialization and provide legal awareness about cooperatives activities in Indonesia. This research uses a normative approach that focuses on studying the legal and regulatory norms associated with the object of the problem. The technical analysis used in this study is the Hermeneutic and Interpretation analysis methods. The results of the study indicate that Phrase “natural person” in the cooperatives sense was based on Article 1 point 1 of Law No. 17 of 2012 is against Article 33 section (1) of The 1945 Constitution because that definition leads to individualism. Furthermore, although the Petitioner's petition is only regarding certain articles it contains substantial norm content, it will cause other articles in Law No. 17 of 2012 has no binding legal force. Therefore the Petitioner's petition must be declared in accordance with the law for all contents of Law No. 17 of 2012. As for the sake of legal certainty, Law No. 25 of 1992 valid for a while awaiting the establishment of a new Law.

scholarly journals POLITIK HUKUM JUDICIAL REVIEW DI INDONESIA

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (Edsus) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kartono Kartono
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Authority ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Review System ◽  
Concrete Problem ◽  
The Law

Although Indonesia judicial review system is not opens the possibility of regulations review under the act against the constitution, das sollen pracitically these conditions may still occur. From political of law the legal authority of constitutional court should be able to put the interests of citizens rights that are based on the principles of recognition, guarantees, protection and legal certainty of a fair and equal treatment before the law. Given that changes in the constitution can not be done easily, then the judicial review in UUD 1945 should not be formulated too limitedly that restricting the organic law to complete and explore the authority that is adaptable to any concrete problem. Keywords: politics of law, constitutional court, UUD 1945, limitedly.

scholarly journals Study of constitutional court decisions cancelling all norms in the law

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 286-308
Author(s):  
Febriansyah Ramadhan ◽  
Ilham Dwi Rafiqi
Keyword(s):  
Water Resources ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Truth And Reconciliation Commission ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Reconciliation Commission ◽  
Truth And Reconciliation ◽  
The Law

This article is the result of research on the heart article in the 3 Constitutional Court Decisions which canceled the entire contents of the law, namely the Constitutional Court Decision Number 001-021-022/PUU-I/2003 which canceled Law Number 20 of 2002 concerning Electricity, Constitutional Court Decision 006/PUU-IV/2006 which canceled Law 27 of 2004 concerning the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Constitutional Court Decisions 11-14-21-126 and 136/PUU-VII/2009 which canceled the Law Number 9 of 2009 concerning Legal Education Entities, and the Constitutional Court Decision 85/PUU-XI/2013 which canceled Law Number 7 of 2004 concerning Water Resources. The term 'heart article' is the term coined by the Constitutional Court and used as the main reason for canceling the entire contents of the law. Unfortunately, in these decisions, the Constitutional Court did not elaborate further on the concept and characteristics of an article categorized as the heart article. Departing from this issue, this research aims to find out what are the concepts and characteristics of the "heart article" of a law that was completely canceled by the Constitutional Court? To help answer this question, this research employed a normative method intended to trace all legal materials, both of the Constitutional Court decisions, statutory regulations, to the literature supporting the research. The importance of this research is to give meaning to the concept of the heart article, which, in the development of legal science, is still rarely discussed. Moreover, it can serve as a reference for petitioners to conduct the judicial review and to identify whether the article being tested is the heart article.

scholarly journals Pelaksanaan Klausul Penyelesaian Sengketa Dalam Akad Perbankan Syariah Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Nomor : 93/PUU-X/2012 Pada Bank Syariah Mandiri KCP Indramayu

Jurnal Akta ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 147
Author(s):  
Mahpudin Mahpudin ◽  
Akhmad Khisni
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Legal Uncertainty ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism

ABSTRAKPutusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Nomor : 93/PUU-X/2012 Tanggal 29 Agustus 2013 telah membatalkan Penjelasan Pasal 55 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 21 Tahun 2008 Tentang Perbankan Syariah adalah soal kepastian hukum. Hal ini dikarenakan dalam Penjelasan pasal 55 ayat (2) menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum antara pilihan hukum dalam lingkup peradilan umum dengan pilihan hukum dalam lingkup peradilan agama. Kepastian hukum secara normatif adalah ketika suatu peraturan dibuat dan diundangkan secara pasti karena dapat memberikan pengaturan secara jelas dan logis. Jelas dalam arti tidak menimbulkan keragu-raguan atau multi tafsir, dan logis dalam arti hukum tersebut menjadi suatu sistem norma dengan norma lain sehingga tidak berbenturan atau menimbulkan konflik norma ataupun adanya kekaburan dan kekosongan norma. Asas ini dapat dipergunakan untuk dapat mengatasi persoalan dalam hal konsep mekanisme dan pilihan hukum dalam penyelesaian sengketa perbankan syariah;Pilihan forum penyelesaian sengketa Perbankan Syariah berdasarkan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Nomor : 93/PUU-X/2012 Tanggal 29 Agustus 2013 yang membatalkan Penjelasan Pasal 55 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 21 Tahun 2008 Tentang Perbankan Syariah harus dinyatakan secara tegas menyatakan dan menyepakati apakah memilih forum Arbitrase Syariah atau menentukan pilihan forum Pengadilan Agama dalam rumusan klausula Penyelesaian Perselisihan atau Sengketa dalam Akad Perbankan Syariahnya. Artinya memilih atau menentukan salah satu forum mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa syariah yaitu forum BASYARNAS atau Pengadilan Agama, bukan menggabungkan keduanya dalam satu rangkaian rumusan klausula penyelesaian sengketa.Kata kunci : klausul penyelesaian sengketa, akad perbankan syariah, putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi ABSTRACTDecision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 93 / PUU-X / 2012 dated August 29, 2013 has annulled the Elucidation of Article 55 paragraph (2) of Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 21 Year 2008 concerning Sharia Banking is a matter of legal certainty. This is because in the Elucidation of article 55 paragraph (2) raises legal uncertainty between the choice of law within the scope of general justice with the choice of law within the scope of religious court. Normative legal certainty is when a rule is created and enacted as it can provide clear and logical arrangements. Clearly in the sense that there is no doubt or multi-interpretation, and logical in the sense that the law becomes a system of norms with other norms so as not to clash or cause conflict of norms or the existence of vagueness and void norms. This principle can be used to solve the problem in terms of the concept of mechanism and choice of law in solving the dispute of sharia banking;The choice of dispute resolution forum of Sharia Banking pursuant to Decision of Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 93 / PUU-X / 2012 dated August 29, 2013 which annul the Elucidation of Article 55 paragraph (2) of Law of Republic of Indonesia Number 21 Year 2008 concerning Sharia Banking must be stated expressly declare and agree on whether to vote for a Shari'ah Arbitration Forum or to determine the choice of Religious Court forums in the formulation of a Clause or Dispute Settlement clause in its Sharia Banking Agreement. It means choosing or determining one of the forums of dispute resolution mechanism of sharia namely BASYARNAS or Religious Court, not merging the two in a series of dispute settlement clause formulas.Keywords: clause of dispute settlement, syariah banking contract, Constitutional Court decision

scholarly journals Implementation The Act Against The Material Law In Act No. 31 of 1999 jo Act No. 20 of 2001 Concerning of Corruption Linked With Constitutional Court's Decision No. 003 / PUU / IV / 2006

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 825
Author(s):  
Danceu Danceu
Keyword(s):  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Study Author ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
The Law

The problem in this research are: (1) How is the location of the nature of the unlawful material law in Act No. 31 of 1999 Jo Act No. 20 of 2001 on the Corruption linked with Constitutional Court Decision No. 003 / PUU / IV / 2006?; (2) What is the nature of policy implementation against the material law in Corruption Act after the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 003 / PUU / IV / 2006? Research methods is descriptive analytical by using sociological juridical approach. The results of the study author shows that the nature of the unlawful material in Act No. 31 of 1999 Jo Act No. 20 of 2001 on the Corruption linked with Constitutional Court Decision No. 003 / PUU / IV / 2006 of the nature of the unlawful material, used as means the eradication of corruption in the Act No. 31 1999 Jo Act No. 20 of 21 declared non-binding with legal certainty (in violation of Article 28 D Constitution 1845), implementation of a policy nature against the law material in Act of Corruption after the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 003 / PUU / IV / 2006 by the legislative arrangements do not exist anymore in the Law on Corruption Eradication.Keywords: Personality Against Material Law; Corruption; Constitutional Court Decision.

scholarly journals Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 93/PUU-X/2012 Bagi Penyelesaian Sengketa Bisnis dan Keuangan Syariah

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 691
Author(s):  
Khotibul Umam
Keyword(s):  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Strong Statement ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
Legal Uncertainty

The Decision of Constitutional Court No. 93/PUU-X/2012 regarding Judicial Review of Law No. 21/2008 regarding Sharia Banking with the Indonesian Constitution 1945 was giving a strong statement that the explanation of this a quolawhas a potential impact to arise legal uncertainty and legal confuse, meanwhile Article 55 in the whole still conform with the Constitution. The juridical implication from this a quodecision, i.e. The tribunal of District Court have to state if they have no authority to settle the case in sharia banking, althought it has been agreed in an akad (agreement). It has been stressed with the nature of Constitutional Court Decision “final and binding” and also bind all of citizens (erga omnes). Then, the opportunity to implement of its decision to sharia businees and financial institutions exist based on analogy, esp argumentum a fortiory. The expectation, it will give legal certainty in the context of Judicial that has an authority to settle the potential dispute between customer and sharia business and financial institutions.

scholarly journals KEWENANGAN LEMBAGA PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PERBANKAN SYARIAH

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 159
Author(s):  
Abdul Rasyid ◽  
Tiska Andita Putri
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Religious Courts ◽  
Legal Force

ABSTRAKSejak diamandemennya Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 1989 tentang Peradilan Agama dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 3 Tahun 2006, kompetensi absolut peradilan agama diperluas. Pasal 55 Undang-Undang Nomor 21 Tahun 2008 tentang Perbankan Syariah memperkuat kewenangan peradilan agama dalam menyelesaikan sengketa perbankan syariah. Polemik muncul ketika Penjelasan Pasal 55 ayat (2) juga memberikan kewenangan kepada peradilan umum menyelesaikan sengketa perbankan syariah. Masalah ini lalu diajukan judicial review ke Mahkamah Konstitusi. Menurut Mahkamah Konstitusi, Penjelasan Pasal 55 ayat (2) bertentangan dengan UUD NRI RI 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi masih menimbulkan perdebatan karena hanya menghapus Penjelasan Pasal 55 ayat (2), bukan menghapus pasalnya. Permasalahan yang akan dibahas dalam tulisan ini adalah lembaga peradilan manakah yang berwenang menyelesaikan sengketa perbankan syariah pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 93/PUU-X/2012? Penelitian ini menggunakan metodologi penelitian yuridis normatif. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa Putusan Nomor 93/PUU-X/2012 terkait kewenangan penyelesaian sengketa perbankan syariah dianggap sudah tepat, memutuskan bahwa penyelesaian sengketa perbankan syariah harus melalui peradilan agama sesuai dengan kompetensi absolutnya. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tersebut telah menghilangkan dualisme penyelesaian sengketa perbankan syariah.Kata kunci: kompetensi, perbankan syariah, Mahkamah Konstitusi. ABSTRACT Since the amendment of Law Number 7 of 1989 concerning Religious Courts with Law Number 3 of 2006, the absolute competence of religious courts was, expand. Article 55 of Law Number 21 of 2008 concerning Sharia Banking strengthens the authority of the religious court in resolving sharia banking disputes. Polemic arises when the elucidation of Article 55 paragraph (2) also allowed the general court to resolve sharia banking disputes. This issue then submitted by judicial review to the Constitutional Court. According to the Constitutional Court, elucidation of Article 55 paragraph (2) is contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and has no binding legal force. The Constitutional Court Decision still raises debate because it only removes the elucidation of Article 55 paragraph (2), instead of deleting the article. The issues that will discuss in this paper are which judicial institution has the authority to settle sharia banking disputes after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 93/PUU-X/2012? This research uses a normative juridical research methodology. This research concludes that Constitutional Court Decision Number 93/PUU-X/2012 related to the authority to settle sharia banking disputes considered appropriate decides that the settlement of sharia banking disputes must go through religious courts by its absolute competence. The Constitutional Court's decision has eliminated dualism in the settlement of sharia banking disputes. Keywords: competence, sharia banking, Constitutional Court.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document