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

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.

Download Full-text

Hukum Internasional sebagai Alat Interpretasi dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang

Jurnal Konstitusi ◽

10.31078/jk1514 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 15 (1) ◽

pp. 73

Author(s):

Umbu Rauta ◽

Ninon Melatyugra

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Review Process ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Legal Research ◽

Conceptual Approach ◽

The Republic ◽

Constitutional Tradition ◽

The Relationship

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

Download Full-text

The Position of Constitutional Complaint in the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Pancasila and Law Review ◽

10.25041/plr.v2i1.2308 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

pp. 61-78

Author(s):

Agsel Awanisa ◽

Yusdianto Yusdianto ◽

Siti Khoiriah

Keyword(s):

South Africa ◽

South Korea ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Research Method ◽

Comparative Approach ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Legal Research ◽

Conceptual Approach ◽

The Republic ◽

Case Number

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

Download Full-text

IMPLIKASI JUDICIAL REVIEW TERHADAP HAK ANGKET YANG DIAJUKAN OLEH DPR PASCA PUTUSAN MK NO.26/PUU-XVI/2017 TENTANG PERMOHONAN HAK ANGKET DPR

Media Keadilan: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum ◽

10.31764/jmk.v11i1.1353 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

pp. 1

Author(s):

Agnes Fitryantica

Keyword(s):

Judicial Review ◽

House Of Representatives ◽

State Power ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Legal Research ◽

The Republic ◽

Negative Implication ◽

Materials Used ◽

Positively Charged

The Constitutional Court based on Article 24C of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia has 4 authorities and 1 obligation. These provisions are further contained in Article 10 of Law Number 24 Year 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court. The constitutional authority of the Constitutional Court in examining, adjudicating and deciding cases of judicial review of the constitution is about the constitutionality of norms. The method used is normative (doctrinal) legal research, using secondary data in the form of primary, tertiary and secondary legal materials. One of the legal materials used as the basis for analysis is the judge's decision and its implications for the judicial review. The results of the study that, the authority to test the Act against the 1945 Constitution theoretically or practically, makes the Constitutional Court as a controlling and balancing body in the administration of state power. The KPK is not the object of the Parlement questionnaire rights. The ruling emphasized that the KPK was an institution that could be the object of the questionnaire right by the Parlement. The implications of the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 36 / PUU-XV / 2017, can be grouped in two ways, namely: first, the implications are positively charged, namely the affirmation of the ownership of the House of Representatives questionnaire rights in Indonesian governance. Second, the negative implication is the possibility of using the DPR's excessive questionnaire rights without regard to existing limitations.Keywords : constitutional court; KPK; parlement.Mahkamah Konstitusi berdasarkan Pasal 24C UUD NRI Tahun 1945 memiliki 4 kewenangan dan 1 kewajiban. Ketentuan tersebut dituangkan lebih lanjut dalam Pasal 10 UU Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Kewenangan konstitusional Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam memeriksa, mengadili dan memutus perkara pengujian undang-undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar adalah mengenai konstitusionalitas norma. Metode yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif (doktrinal), dengan menggunakan data sekunder berupa bahan hukum primer, tersier dan sekunder. Salah satu bahan hukum yang dijadikan dasar analisis adalah putusan hakim dan implikasinya terhadap yudicial review. Hasil penelitian bahwa, kewenangan menguji Undang-Undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 secara teoritis atau praktis, menjadikan Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagai lembaga pengontrol dan penyeimbang dalam penyelenggaraan kekuasaan negara, Dalam Putusan Nomor 36/PUU-XV/2017, Mahkamah Konstitusi memutuskan menolak permohonan pemohon yang pada intinya menyebut KPK bukan merupakan objek hak angket DPR. Putusan tersebut menegaskan KPK merupakan lembaga yang dapat menjadi objek hak angket oleh DPR. Implikasi dari putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 36/PUU-XV/2017 tersebut, dapat dikelompokkan dalam dua hal, yaitu: pertama, implikasi yang bermuatan positif, yaitu penegasan dimilikinya hak angket Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat dalam ketatanegaran Indonesia. Kedua, Implikasi yang bermuatan negatif yaitu adanya kemungkinan penggunaan hak angket DPR yang eksesif tanpa memperhatikan batasan-batasan yang ada.Kata Kunci: DPR; KPK; Mahkamah Konstitusi.

Download Full-text

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)

Negara Hukum Membangun Hukum untuk Keadilan dan Kesejahteraan ◽

10.22212/jnh.v8i2.1052 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Keberlakuan Yurisprudensi pada Kewenangan Pengujian Undang-Undang dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi

Jurnal Konstitusi ◽

10.31078/jk1539 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 15 (3) ◽

pp. 642 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Oly Viana Agustine

Keyword(s):

Judicial Review ◽

Civil Law ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Analysis Method ◽

Case Study Approach ◽

Literature Study ◽

Law System ◽

Study Approach ◽

The Republic

Keberlakuan yurisprudensi sebagai salah satu sumber hukum yang diakui di Indonesia selalu menarik untuk dilakukan penelitian. Indonesia yang terpengaruh dengan sistem hukum civil law pada dasarnya tidak mengikatkan diri pada yurisprudensi. Namun apabila ada putusan yang dianggap kontradiksi dengan putusan sebelumnya menjadi perdebatan mengenai bagaimana keberlakuan yurisprudensi yang telah ada. Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagai salah satu pelaku kekuasaan kehakiman memiliki kewenangan melakukan pengujian undang-undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia tahun 1945. Dalam kewenangannya tersebut, terkadang Mahkamah Konstitusi dibenturkan dengan putusan terdahulu yang telah menjadi landmark namun tidak diikuti. Dengan kata lain, terdapat kontradiksi antara putusan yang terdahulu dengan putusan yang ada saat ini. Dalam penelitian ini akan dilihat bagaimana keberlakuan yurisprudensi pada pengujian undang-undang dalam putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Metode analisis yang digunakan adalah studi pustaka dengan menggunakan pendekatan studi kasus. Kesimpulan yang didapat dalam penelitian ini adalah bahwa yurisprudensi adalah sumber hukum yang dapat menjadi rujukan dalam memutus suatu perkara pengujian undang-undang namun tidak mengikat hakim untuk menyimpanginya berdasarkan alasan yang logis sesuai dengan pinsip the judiciary independence dan judiciary accountability serta konsepsi the living constitution.The enforceability of jurisprudence as one of the recognized legal sources in Indonesia is a compelling research topic. Indonesia that uses the civil law on law system does not bind to jurisprudence. Nevertheless, if there is a decision that is contradictory to the previous one, that will be a debate over how the enforceability of the existed jurisprudence. The Constitutional Court as one of the judicial authority has the authority to examine the law against the Constitution 1945 of the State of the Republic of Indonesia. In its authority, the Constitutional Court is bumped by a previous decision which has become a landmark but was not followed. In other words, there is a contradiction between the previous decision and the present decision. This research will see how the enforceability of jurisprudence on the judicial review in the decision of the Constitutional Court. The analysis method used is literature study using case study approach. The conclusion available in this study is that jurisprudence is a source of law that can be a reference in a union of judicial review cases but not bound by judges to deviate based on logical reasons in the judiciary independence and judiciary accountability as well as the conception of the living constitution.

Download Full-text

Erga Omnes Terhadap Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Dalam Perspektif Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan

SALAM Jurnal Sosial dan Budaya Syar i ◽

10.15408/sjsbs.v6i4.13707 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (4) ◽

pp. 331-342

Author(s):

Sucahyono Sucahyono

Keyword(s):

Judicial Review ◽

Research Method ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Review System ◽

Literature Study ◽

Decentralized System ◽

The Law ◽

The Republic ◽

Centralized System

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

Download Full-text

AKIBAT HUKUM PUTUSAN PERNYATAAN PAILIT PENGADILAN NIAGA NOMOR 03/Pdt/Sus-Pailit/2015/PN.NIAGA.SMG TERHADAP HARTA KEKAYAAN DEBITUR SERTA PERBUATAN HUKUM DEBITUR

Jurnal Privat Law ◽

10.20961/privat.v7i1.30136 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

pp. 110

Author(s):

Readytya Aji , ◽

Albertus Sentot Sudarwanto ,

Keyword(s):

Data Collection ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Court Decision ◽

Literature Study ◽

Legal Research ◽

Research Instrument ◽

Analytical Technique ◽

Study Research ◽

Legal Consequences

Abstract This article aims to know the legal consequences of the verdict of bankruptcy declaration of Debtor’s assets as well as the legal actions of the debtor. The purpose of the legal consequences is the rights and obligations arising after the Debtor has been given the verdict of bankruptcy declaration. This research is descriptive normative legal research. The types and sources of data used are secondary data in the form of primary legal materials and secondary legal materials. The data collection techniques used are document studies and literature study, research instrument is the Commercial Court Judgment Number 03 / Pdt.Sus-Bankrupt / 2015 / PN.NIAGA.SMG. The analytical technique used is deductive syllogism. The verdict regarding the bankruptcy lawsuit against PT. Riverside Indonesia as Defendant and 2 of its Creditors as Plaintiff. The result of this research is that there are some legal consequences of the verdict of bankruptcy declaration to Debtor’s property as well as legal actions of Debtor, that is, among others, bankruptcy decisions which can be executed immediately, public confiscation of Debitor’s property, loss of Debtor’s authority over the control of his property, legal consequences against the engagement after bankruptcy, the legal consequences for the payment of the debtor’s debtor’s account, the legal consequences of the previous court decision, force the agency / gijzeling, and actio pauliana in bankruptcy. Keywords : Bankruptcy, Legal Consequences, Debtor, The Debtor’s AssetsAbstrak Artikel ini bertujuan mengetahui akibat hukum putusan pernyataan pailit terhadap harta kekayaan Debitor serta perbuatan hukum Debitor. Maksud dari akibat hukum tersebut yaitu hak dan kewajiban apa yang ditimbulkan setelah Debitor dijatuhi putusan pernyataan pailit. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian hukum normatif yang bersifat deskriptif. Jenis dan sumber data yang digunakan adalah data sekunder yang berupa bahan hukum primer dan bahan hukum sekunder. Teknik pengumpulan data yang digunakan adalah studi dokumen dan studi kepustakaan, instrumen penelitian adalah Putusan Pengadilan Niaga Nomor 03/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2015/PN.NIAGA.SMG. Teknik analisis yang digunakan adalah deduktif silogisme. Putusan tersebut mengenai gugatan pailit terhadap PT. Riverside Indonesia sebagai Tergugat dan 2 orang Kreditornya sebagai Penggugat. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah terdapat beberapa akibat hukum dari putusan pernyataan pailit terhadap harta kekayaan Debitor serta perbuatan hukum Debitor, yaitu antara lain putusan pailit yang dapat dijalankan serta merta, sitaan umum atas harta kekayaan Debitor, hilangnya wewenang Debitor atas penguasaan harta kekayaannya, akibat hukum terhadap perikatan setelah pailit, akibat hukum terhadap pembayaran piutang Debitor pailit, akibat hukum terhadap penetapan putusan pengadilan sebelumnya, paksa badan / gijzeling, dan actio pauliana dalam kepailitan. Kata Kunci : Kepailitan, Akibat Hukum, Debitor, Harta Kekayaan Debitor

Download Full-text

Tanggung Jawab Notaris Dalam Pembuatan Akta Perjanjian Nominee Dalam Kaitannya Dengan Kepemilikan Tanah Oleh Warga Negara Asing Di Lombok

Jurnal Akta ◽

10.30659/akta.v5i1.2530 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

pp. 43

Author(s):

M. Edwin Azhari ◽

Djauhari Djauhari

Keyword(s):

Data Collection ◽

Property Rights ◽

Field Data ◽

Code Of Ethics ◽

Legal Issue ◽

Literature Study ◽

Legal Research ◽

Empirical Law ◽

Materials Used ◽

Legal Consequences

ABSTRAKPenelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan hukum yuridis-empiris (sosio-legal research). Jenis penelitian hukum empiris merupakan jenis penelitian yang menganalisa suatu permasalahan hukum atau isu hukum berdasarkan suatu permasalahan yang ada dalam masyarakat itu sendiri dengan cara mendapatkan data lapangan. Bahan hukum yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder dan bahan hukum tersier. Teknik pengumpulan data yang digunakan adalah studi kepustakaan, yang didukung data lapangan melalui observasi dan wawancara.Bentuk perjanjian nominee yang dibuat oleh warga negara asing dengan warga negara Indonesia di Lombok, yaitu dibuat dengan akta otentik oleh Notaris, melalui akta jual beli dengan menggunakan nama warga negara Indonesia selanjutnya melahirkan perjanjian-perjanjian lainnya. Bentuk pertanggungjawaban notaris terhadap perjanjian nominee yang dibuatnya yaitu tanggung jawab secara Perdata, Pidana dan Kode Etik. Akibat hukum dari perjanjian nominee yang dibuat oleh Notaris tersebut merupakan perbuatan penyelundupan hukum yang bertentangan dengan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berakibat perjanjian nominee batal demi hukum.Kata Kunci : Perjanjian, Hak Milik, Nominee.ABSTRACTThis research uses juridical-empirical legal approach (socio-legal research). The type of research empirical law is a type of research that analyzes a legal issue or legal issue based on a problem that exists within the community itself by obtaining field data. The legal materials used in this study are primary legal materials, secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials. Data collection techniques used are literature study, supported by field data through observation and interview. The form of a nominee agreement made by a foreign citizen with an Indonesian citizen in Lombok, which is made by an authentic deed by a Notary, through the deed of sale and purchase using the name of the Indonesian citizen subsequently gave birth to other agreements. Forms of responsibility of a notary to the nominee agreement he made, namely, Civil, Criminal and Code of Ethics. The legal consequences of the nominee agreement made by the Notary are legal smuggling acts contrary to the provisions of laws and regulations which result in the nominee agreement null and void.Keyword : Legal Agreement, Property Rights, Nominee.

Download Full-text

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

STAATSRECHT Indonesian Constitutional Law Journal ◽

10.15408/siclj.v4i2.18754 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

Jurnal Konstitusi ◽

10.31078/jk12110 ◽

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.

Download Full-text