scholarly journals Pengujian Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Marwan Hsb
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Form Of Government ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

Article 24C Section (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia authorizes the Constitutional Court to reviewthe law against the constitution. However, when referring to the hierarchy of legislation, the law has the equal hierarchy with government regulation in lieu of law. It makes a question whether the Constitutional Court truly has the authority to review government regulation in lieu of law against the constitution? Based on the research in this paper, it was found that by the Constitutional Court Decision Number 138/PUU-VII/2009, the Constitutional Court stated that the authority to review government regulation in lieu of law under the authority of the Constitutional Court because the substance of government regulation in lieu of law is similar with the substance of law. So, the Constitutional Court has the authority to review a government regulation in lieu of law materially. Such decision is correct; the Constitutional Court has the authority to review a government regulation in lieu of law in material because the substance is similar with the law. While formally reviewing should be the authority of the Supreme Court due to government regulation in lieu of law formally is in the form of government regulation

scholarly journals PASANG SURUT HUBUNGAN ANTARA MAHKAMAH AGUNG DENGAN KOMISI YUDISIAL DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN REPUBLIK INDONESIA

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Fauzan
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Relationship

The relationship between the Supreme Court by the Judicial Commission in the Republic of Indonesia system is not harmonious, this is due to the first, the disharmony between the law on judicial power, including the law on Judicial Power, the law on the Supreme Court, the law on Constitutional Court and the law on the Judicial Commission. Both of the leadership character that exist in the Supreme Court and the Judicial Commission were too emphasizes in ego that one sector feel more superior than the others. To create a harmonious relationship between Supreme Court and Judicial Commission can be done by establishing intensive communication between both of them and by improvement in legislation. Keywords : relation, Supreme Court, Judicial Commission   

scholarly journals PENYELESAIAN PERSELISIHAN HASIL PEMILIHAN KEPALA DAERAH PASCA PUTUSAN MK NO. 97/PUU-XI.2013

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 139
Author(s):  
Indra Hendrawan
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Law ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism ◽  
Regional Leaders

Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 tentang Penetapan Perpu Nomor 1 Tahun 2014 tentang Pemilihan Gubernur, Bupati dan Walikota Menjadi Undang-Undang mengamanatkan Mahkamah Agung sebagai lembaga yang berwenang menyelesaikan perselisihan hasil pemilihan kepala daerah. Namun tanpa sempat diimplementasikan, Undang-Undang tersebut telah direvisi kembali melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2015 dengan melimpahkan penyelesaian perselisihan hasil pemilihan ke badan peradilan khusus. Perubahan Undang-Undang secara cepat tersebut telah menimbulkan pertanyaan, kemanakah arah kebijakan penyelesaian perselisihan di masa mendatang? Dengan pendekatan yuridis normative, tulisan ini mencoba menguraikan refleksi penyelesaian perselisihan di Mahkamah Agung ataupun Mahkamah Konstitusi selama satu dasawarsa terakhir untuk mendapatkan penanganan ideal yang harus dilakukan dalam rangka perbaikan penanganan perselisihan hasil pemilihan kepala daerah di masa mendatang. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, penempatan hakim-hakim yang berintegritas, mumpuni serta yang mengedepankan keadilan substantif dalam penyelesaian perselisihan merupakan hal mutlak yang harus dilakukan. Selain itu, perbaikan juga tidak cukup hanya pada tahap penanganan perselisihan hasil saja, perlu pula ada optimalisasi penegakan hukum di tahap-tahap sebelumnya yang dilakukan oleh KPU, Bawaslu/Panwaslu, DKPP ataupun penegak hukum lainnya.<p>Law No. 1 of 2015 on Enactment of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2014 concerning the election of Governor, the Regent and Mayor Become Law mandates the Supreme Court as an authorized institution to settle disputes about electoral result from the local election for regional leaders. However, without a chance to be implemented, the Law has been revised by Law No. 8 of 2015 in which any disputes that arise from the results of the election are delegated to a special judicial body. The ammendment has raised question, to where the policy of dispute resolution will be directed in the future? Using normative juridical approach, this paper tries to elaborate the reflection of dispute resolution in the Supreme Court or the Constitutional Court during the last decade to find out ideal treatment should be applied in order to improve the dispute resolution mechanism in the future. So, the placement of judges who have integrity, capability, and put the substantive fairness in the dispute resolution is absolute term. In addition, the improvement is not enough in just handling the dispute resolution stage, there should also be optimizing of the the law enforcement in the earlier stages that were carried out by the General Election Commission, Bawaslu/Panwaslu, DKPP or other law enforcement bodies.</p>

scholarly journals Examine The Constitutionality Of Regulations Under Laws That Are Not Contrary To The Law But Contrary To The Constitution

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-113
Author(s):  
Aditya Yuli Sulistyawan ◽  
I Putu Eka Cakra
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Authority ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Kewenangan untuk memeriksa UU terhadap Konstitusi dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dan pengujian hukum dan peraturan berdasarkan Undang-Undang tentang Hukum dilaksanakan oleh Mahkamah Agung sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 24 A paragraf 1 dan 24 C paragraf 1 Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. Namun, dalam perumusan pasal a quo ternyata masih menyisakan masalah, yaitu belum mengatur mekanisme pengujian norma yang terkandung dalam undang-undang di bawah undang-undang jika ternyata tidak bertentangan dengan undang-undang tetapi bertentangan dengan konstitusi. Tulisan ini membahas pengujian norma-norma undang-undang melalui Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 tentang kewenangan peradilan di casu a quo pasal 24 A ayat 1 dan 24 C ayat 1 Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. Kata kunci: otoritas, hukum, konstitusi. Abstract The authority to examine the Law against the Constitution is carried out by the Constitutional Court and the testing of the laws and regulations under the Law on the Law is carried out by the Supreme Court as regulated in article 24 A paragraph 1 and 24 C paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. However, in the formulation of the article a quo it turns out still leaves a problem, namely not yet regulating the norm testing mechanism contained in the legislation under the legislation if it turns out it is not contrary to the law but contrary to the constitution. This paper analyzes the testing of the norms of the legislation through the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Republic IX concerning judicial authority in casu a quo article 24 A paragraph 1 and 24 C paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Keyword: authority, law, the constitution.

scholarly journals Judicial Review On The Authority Of National Institution In The Disbanding Of Community Organization Who Are Contradicting The 1945 Constitution Of The Republic Of Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (12) ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Theo Negoro ◽  
Demson Tiopan ◽  
Haykal Hassanain
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Community Organization ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Community Organizations ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Temporary Suspension ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

A community organization who contradicts the constitution will obviously disturb the common order and also disturb the system of Indonesian people and the nation itself, especially if such organization aims to change the Indonesian constitution. In Chapter XVII of Law Number 17 of 2013 regarding Community Organization, later known as the Community Organization Law, it is stated that the disbanding of community organization must go through a procedure which consist of a warning, temporary suspension and then the disbanding by the court of law. In the Community Organization Law, the disbanding of an organization is done by a Judicative Institution which is through the decision of a judicial board. However, the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 2 of 2017 regarding the Amendment on Law Number 17 of 2013 regarding Community Organization, later known as the Government Regulation in Lieu of Community Organization Law states that the disbanding of a Community Organization contradicting the constitution only goes through the administrative admonition, temporary suspension of activity, and later the revocation of listed certification or the revocation of lawful institution status by the Government. The purpose of this research is to discover the authority of National Institution in disbanding Community Organization that contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and also the authoritative obstacle faced by the national institution in dissolving such organizations. This research is a normative one which researched existing secondary data as a literary data supported by empirical data acquired from interview processes. Result of the research shows that the governmental institution which in this case are the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and Judicative Institution which in this case the Supreme Court has authority to disband Community Organizations that contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia based on normative terms. However, in order to establish justice on said organization, the disbanding must be done by Judicative Institution so that it is more objective, but not by the Supreme Court, but by the Constitutional Court, due to the existence of Public Organizations being closely related to the Constitutional Right the way it is for the Political Parties. This research suggests that the disbanding of Community Organizations that contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia should be done by the Constitutional Court, preceded by material check on the applicable positive law.   Keywords: Authority; National Institution; Community Organization; Constitution

scholarly journals The Harmonization of Authority of Supreme Court, Constitution Court, and the Judicial Commission

FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
La Ode Angga La Ode Angga
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Fifth Amendment ◽  
Absolute Power ◽  
Dead End ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

The Harmonization of the Authority between Supreme Court (MA) institutions The Constitutional Court (MK) and Judicial Commission (KY) is a must. It is done by way of revision of the Law of the Supreme Court, MK and KY for the harmonization of authority. However, if the revision finds a dead end, then the fifth amendment (5) of the 1945 Constitution of the State of the Republic of Indonesia (UUDNRI 1945) is limited to be reconstructed by the provision of Article 24B paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution by affirming the authority of KY clear so that it is not considered to interfere with judicial power. The harmonization can be done by adding an institution that oversees the authority of the Constitutional Court by performing reconstruction in Article 24B paragraph (1) so that there is no more tendency of absolute power. The supervised judge is a judge of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court.  Keywords: Harmonization, Authority, Supreme Court, Constitutional Court, Judicial Commission.

scholarly journals POLITIK HUKUM PENGAWASAN HAKIM KONSTITUSI

FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhtadi Muhtadi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Law And Justice ◽  
Ethics Council

In order to preserve and uphold the honor, dignity, and the behavior of the judge is required to supervise the attitude constitutional judge to fit the code of ethics, so that each judge's ruling will be implemented in order to enforce the law and justice based on Pancasila and the Constitution 1945 as a permanent legal political for supervision of the constitutional judges. Whereas legal politics incidental that becomes choice among others: a) Behavior of Constitutional Judges are overseen by the Board of Ethics established by the Constitutional Court, and for the reported judges or suspected violations of ethic codes of Constitutional Judges formed by Honorary Council of the Constitutional Judges whose creation was proposed by Ethics Council, with the task of implementing and serves as ethic judicial; and b) there is no judicial supervision against Constitutional Court's decision as well as supervision of a court decision which was in the Supreme Court through the mechanism of legal remedies (ordinary and extraordinary). Keywords: Supervision, Behavior, Constitutional Judges

scholarly journals ANALISIS PENYELESIAN SENGKETA INTERNAL LEMBAGA NEGARA (STUDI KASUS PELANTIKAN PIMPINAN DEWAN PERWAKILAN DAERAH REPUBLIK INDONESIA PERIODE 2017-2019)

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 364
Author(s):  
Yanzah Bagas Nugraha ◽  
Dwi Andayani Budisetyowati
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
State Institution ◽  
The State ◽  
The Body ◽  
Internal Conflict ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Leadership Tenure ◽  
The People ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic

The establishment of the Regional Representative Council of the Republic of Indonesia so called Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPD-RI) at least has two objectives. The first is to enhance justice for the people in the region. Secondly, to expanding and increasing the participation of local communities in national life. The process to form this state institution is done by amending the 3rd amendment of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic Indonesia. However, in doing that  amendment there was an internal conflict within the body of DPD-RI involving the old and the new leaders of this institution last year. The length of leadership tenure which was initially made 5 years was amended to became 2.5 years. The different length of leadership tenure was then canceled by the Supreme Court and it was decided to be the same as other institution such as The People’s Consultative Assembly and The House of Representative in that the leadership tenure should be in accordance with the electoral cycle of 5 years. However, although the regulation of DPD-RI has been canceled, the Supreme Court keeps sending its representative to guide the oath of position of the new DPD-RI leadership. The only regulation that has been introduced by the state was regulation toward conflict between state institutions and this conflict can merely be resolved by the Constitutional Court. Therefore, there is an urgent need for the state to seek solution to solve this problem to prevent the same thing happened to other state institution in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document