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 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 JUDICIAL REVIEW SEBAGAI SARANA PERLINDUNGAN HAK-HAK ASASI WARGA NEGARA

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (22) ◽  
pp. 170-181
Author(s):  
Safi’ Safi’
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Recent Time ◽  
Public Acceptance ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Community Groups ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Observing the development of public acceptance of the substance of the laws that were generated in recent time, the right of judicial review of an option that can not be avoided for the 'correct' errors that might occur in a legal product to guarantee the protection of constitutional rights of citizens. The tendency in this direction can be seen from the desire of some community groups to apply for judicial review and claim that they are legal products containing controversial value both to the Supreme Court nor the Constitutional Court. If prior to the amendment of the 1945 Constitution, laws and regulations that can be petitioned for review of material just under the Act against the Constitution, but after the 1945 amendment, the legislation level as the Act was that the Act and also Perpu material can be petitioned for review to the Constitutional Court.

scholarly journals Constitutional Complaint Sebagai Penambah Kewenangan Baru Dalam Undang-Undang Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nurul Komariah ◽  
Muhammad Romadhoni Nur Matori Ridwan ◽  
Alivia Vabesta ◽  
Ginanjar Damayanti ◽  
Siti Nariyah
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Secondary Sources ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right

Guarantee the rights of every citizen for violations of constitutional rights by seeking to increase the authority of the Judicial Review Request by every justice seeker for violations of constitutional rights, but not at least the petition was granted.  The Mahkarnah of the Constitution, which checks what the petition is made of, often considers that what the Judicial Review proposes is not the subject of acknowledgment.  Constitutional Court Judges considered it to be a Constitutional complaint in which this constitutional complaint was not part of the Court's authority in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and the applicable Law on the Understanding of the Constitution.  As a legislative body, the DPR is the one who has the right to change the Constitutional Court Law by including the authority of Constitutional complaint to the Constitutional Court. In this paper the author uses a research method in the form of quality data analysis with secondary sources of literature and deductive logic analysis.  Consitional Complaint to the Constitutional Court.

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 MODEL PENGUJIAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN SATU ATAP MELALUI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 247
Author(s):  
Sholahuddin Al-Fatih
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Regulatory Testing ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Bureaucratic Reform

Post-reform of the role of judicial institution is run by two institutions namely the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. The duties and authorities of the two institutions are regulated in the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia 1945 and the act that addresses the three institutions more specifically. Several powers possessed by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, one of them is the authority to judicial review. The Constitutional Court is authorized to review the act on the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia 1945, while the Supreme Court is authorized to review under the Act on the above legislation.The unfairness of the regulatory testing function is feared to trigger bureaucratic inefficiency. Based on data released by the Supreme Court Clerk, it was recorded during 2016 that the Supreme Court received 18,514 cases, including the Hak Uji Materi (HUM) subject to legislation under the Act. While the number of cases of judicial review of the Constitutional Court in 2016-2017 amounted to only 332 cases. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a bureaucratic reform and provide new ideas related to the model of one court of judicial review in Indonesia. So that in this paper will be discussed deeply about problematic of judicial review in Indonesia and the authority of the Constitutional Court to review the act under one roof with SIJURI mechanism.

scholarly journals Konsistensi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Pengujian Beberapa Undang-Undang Terkait Kesehatan

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 763
Author(s):  
Ade Irawan Taufik
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Private Matter ◽  
The Right ◽  
Material Tests

 Timbulnya pengakuan kesehatan sebagai hak asasi menunjukan perubahan paradigma yang luar biasa, karena kesehatan tidak lagi dipandang hanya sebagai urusan pribadi namun sebagai bentuk tanggung jawab negara dan hak hukum (legal rights). Tujuan diberlakukannya berbagai undang-undang terkait kesehatan adalah untuk memberikan jaminan konstitusionalitas hak atas kesehatan, namun dengan diberlakukannya berbagai undang-undang tersebut tidak berarti terjaminnya hak konstitusional atas kesehatan, hal ini tergambar dengan banyaknya uji materi terhadap berbagai undang-undang tersebut. Banyaknya permohonan uji materi tersebut menarik untuk diteliti terhadap prinsip-prinsip atau asas-asas yang melandasi materi muatan berbagai undang-undang terkait kesehatan dan konsistensi antar putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) dan konsistensi Putusan MK dengan prinsip atau asas yang melandasi materi muatan undang-undang terkait kesehatan. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif disimpulkan bahwa prinsip-prinsip atau asas mempunyai arti penting sebagai landasan materi undang-undang sehingga dapat dijadikan sebagai batu uji dalam melakukan pengujian undang-undang. Kesimpulan lainnya yakni terdapat inkonsistensi antar putusan MK dan inkonsistensi putusan MK dengan prinsip atas asas yang melandasi materi muatan berbagai undang-undang terkait kesehatan.The emergence of the recognition of health as a human right shows an extraordinary paradigm shift, because health is no longer seen only as a private matter but as a form of state responsibility and legal rights. The purpose of the enactment of various laws related to health is to provide a constitutional guarantee of the right to health, however, the enactment of these various laws does not mean the guarantee of constitutional rights to health, this is showed by the number of judicial review of various laws. The number of requests for material tests is interesting to be examined on the principles that underlie the contents of various health related to laws and consistency between decisions of the Constitutional Court (MK) and consistency of decisions of the Constitutional Court to the principles that underlie the content of laws related to health. By using the normative juridical research method, it can be concluded that principles have an important meaning as a basis for the material of the law so that they can be used as a touchstone in conducting the testing of laws. Another conclusion is that there are inconsistencies between the Constitutional Court's decisions and the inconsistency of the Constitutional Court's decision to the principle on the basis of the material content of various laws related to health.

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 URGENSI PEMBENTUKAN UNDANG-UNDANG HAK ANGKET DPR RI (THE URGENCY OF MAKING THE LAW ON THE RIGHT OF INQUIRY OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA)

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-194
Author(s):  
Novianto Murthi Hantoro
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Current Regulation ◽  
Presidential System ◽  
Subject And Object ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

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.

scholarly journals La responsabilidad civil de los magistrados del tribunal constitucional en tela de juicio = Civil liability of Constitutional Court Judges al issue

2014 ◽  
pp. 561
Author(s):  
Luis E. Delgado del Rincón
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Liability ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Right Of Access

En el trabajo se analiza la responsabilidad civil de los magistrados del Tribunal Constitucional teniendo en cuenta dos resoluciones judiciales. La primera, una sentencia de la Sala Primera del Tribunal Supremo, de 23 de enero de 2004 que, extralimitándose de sus funciones, condenó a los magistrados del Tribunal Constitucional por responsabilidad civil por culpa grave. La segunda, la sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional 133/2013, de 5 de junio que, casi diez años después, anula la decisión de la Sala Primera del Supremo por vulneración de dos derechos fundamentales de los magistrados constitucionales: el derecho de acceso a las funciones y cargos públicos, al impedir su ejercicio sin perturbaciones ilegítimas y el derecho a la tutela judicial efectiva, por dictar una resolución judicial con defectos constitucionales de motivación.The paper analyzes the civil liability of judges of the Constitutional Court considering two judicial decisions. The first, a judgment of the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of 23January 2004, exceeding their functions, condemned the Constitutional Court judges from civil liability for gross negligence. Second, the Constitutional Court133/2013, of 5 June, almost ten years later, annuls the decision of the First Chamber of the Supreme for violation of two fundamental constitutional rights of judges: the right of access to public offices, to prevent illegitimate exercise without interferenceand the right to judicial protection, to render a judgment on constitutional defects reasons.

scholarly journals PENGUATAN PENGATURAN HAK ANAK BERDASARKAN KONSTITUSI DAN PERBANDINGAN KONSTITUSI DIBERBAGAI NEGARA

AN-NISA ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 372-383
Author(s):  
Ismail Aris
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Child Protection ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Constitutional Protection ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

This article shows that the constitution or the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia can not be regarded as children's constitution which adopts the principles of child protection under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. It also shows that Indonesia is not serious about the theme of child protection discourse such as Ecuador, Egypt, Finland and South Africa in protecting, fulfilling and respecting and explicitly specifying the rights of children in its constitution. Based on the argument above, it is very urgent for Indonesia to do constitutionalism the rights of the child. Based on the principles that adopted by the convention on the right of the child as a solution as an effort to save and protect the rights of the child from negligence and neglect of the State to protect and fulfill the human rights and constitutional rights of the child. The effort of constitutionalism is also considered as a strengthening effort in the formation of legislation in the future as well as the basis or test stone of the Constitutional Court in handling the future judicial review of the Law which violates the norm on the protection of children's rights under the Constitution. In addition, it is urgent for constitutionalism and incorporates the idea of constitutional complaints in the Constitutional Court through the Constitution. Thus, as a basis for constitutional protection of the child if the State has neglect to protect the human rights and constitutional rights of the child by conducting constitutional complaint in the Constitutional Court, in order for the State to fulfill its constitutional obligations which have been regulated under the constitution.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document