scholarly journals FUNGSI PENGAWASAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG DALAM PENYELENGGARAAN PERADILAN YANG IMPARSIAL

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-28
Author(s):  
Said Sampara
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
The Supreme Court

Implementation of judicial power in the realization of judicial impartiality rests on their independence and the independence of judiciary in performing the duties of his judicial is not affected by any power, as well as the responsibilities imposed on judges in carrying out the task of checking and deciding cases and functions of the Supreme Court under the supervision of the judiciary the impartiality in the administration of judicial power, manifested in the form of preventive supervision, in the form of signs norms enshrined in both the legislation and the code of ethics and code of conduct of judges. In addition, there are forms of repressive supervision which in practice is carried out by the Supreme Court and the Judicial Commission.  Abstrak Implementasi kekuasaan kehakiman dalam perwujudan imparsialitas yudisial bertumpu pada independensi mereka dan independensi kehakiman dalam menjalankan tugas-tugas kehakimannya tidak dipengaruhi oleh kekuasaan apa pun, serta tanggung jawab yang dibebankan pada hakim dalam melaksanakan tugas memeriksa dan memutuskan kasus dan fungsi Mahkamah Agung di bawah pengawasan pengadilan, ketidakberpihakan dalam administrasi kekuasaan kehakiman, yang diwujudkan dalam bentuk pengawasan preventif, dalam bentuk tanda-tanda norma yang diabadikan baik dalam undang-undang dan kode etik serta kode perilaku hakim. Selain itu, ada bentuk pengawasan represif yang dalam praktiknya dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Agung dan Komisi Yudisial.

scholarly journals FUNGSI PENGAWASAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG DALAM PENYELENGGARAAN PERADILAN YANG IMPARSIAL

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-28
Author(s):  
Said Sampara
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
The Supreme Court

Implementation of judicial power in the realization of judicial impartiality rests on their independence and the independence of judiciary in performing the duties of his judicial is not affected by any power, as well as the responsibilities imposed on judges in carrying out the task of checking and deciding cases and functions of the Supreme Court under the supervision of the judiciary the impartiality in the administration of judicial power, manifested in the form of preventive supervision, in the form of signs norms enshrined in both the legislation and the code of ethics and code of conduct of judges. In addition, there are forms of repressive supervision which in practice is carried out by the Supreme Court and the Judicial Commission.  Abstrak Implementasi kekuasaan kehakiman dalam perwujudan imparsialitas yudisial bertumpu pada independensi mereka dan independensi kehakiman dalam menjalankan tugas-tugas kehakimannya tidak dipengaruhi oleh kekuasaan apa pun, serta tanggung jawab yang dibebankan pada hakim dalam melaksanakan tugas memeriksa dan memutuskan kasus dan fungsi Mahkamah Agung di bawah pengawasan pengadilan, ketidakberpihakan dalam administrasi kekuasaan kehakiman, yang diwujudkan dalam bentuk pengawasan preventif, dalam bentuk tanda-tanda norma yang diabadikan baik dalam undang-undang dan kode etik serta kode perilaku hakim. Selain itu, ada bentuk pengawasan represif yang dalam praktiknya dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Agung dan Komisi Yudisial.

scholarly journals INDONESIAN JUSTICE LEGAL POLITICS POST AMENDMENT OF 1945 CONSTITUTION

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-56
Author(s):  
Aladin Sirait
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
State Institution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Creation

The essence of change in the field of justice after the amendment is a change in the system of judicial power at the constitutional and statutory levels. The creation of new supreme judicial institutions namely the Constitutional Court, in addition to the Supreme Court as the bearer and executor of the highest judicial powers in the presence of an independent Judicial Commission and cannot be separated from the powers of the judiciary. Legal politics that gave birth to the Constitutional Court Institution in its scope of duties and authority has played a large and important role in the goal of realizing justice. The Judicial Commission in its duties and authorities can substantially improve law enforcement in the environment and justice within the Supreme Court by proposing the appointment of a Chief Justice to the House of Representatives (DPR). The Supreme Court made progress with the issuance of Guidelines for the Implementation of Oversight within the Judiciary and the Joint Decree of the Chair of the Supreme Court and the Chair of the Judicial Commission on the Code of Ethics and the Code of Conduct for Judges. The Constitutional Court and Judicial Commission in its position as a high state institution with a strict division of tasks and authority has played a role in the creation of checks and balances mechanisms.

scholarly journals THE COMPARISON BETWEEN THE JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA AND THE NETHERLANDS COUNCIL FOR THE JUDICIARY

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 40
Author(s):  
Suparto Suparto
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Personnel Administration

The purpose of this study is to analyze the position and authority of the Judicial Commission of the Republic of Indonesia and its comparison to the Netherlands Council for the Judiciary. This comparative study applied a normative juridical method. The data used in this study were secondary data. The collected data were then analyzed qualitatively. The results showed that Judicial Commission has an important position in judicial system in Indonesia so as structurally, its position is aligned with the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Yet, functionally, its role is auxiliary to the judicial power institutions. Although the function of the Judicial Commission is related to judicial power, but the Judicial Commission is not an agent of judicial power, rather, it is an agency enforcing code of ethics of judges. Besides, the Judicial Commission is also not involved in the organization, personnel, administration and financial matters of judges. This condition is different from the Judicial Commission in European countries, such as the Netherlands. The Judicial Commission in the Netherlands (The Netherlands Council for the Judiciary) has an authority in the area of technical policy and policy making in the field of justice. The Netherlands Council for the Judiciary and other Judicial Commission in European countries generally have the authority in managing organization, budget and administration as well as in conducting promotions, transfers, and recruitments as well as imposing sanctions on judges. Thus, the Supreme Court only focuses on carrying out judicial functions and does not deal with administrative and judicial organization matters.�Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui dan memahami tentang kedudukan dan kewenangan Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia serta perbandingannya dengan Komisi Yudisial Belanda. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu yuridis normatif dengan cara perbandingan (komparatif). Data yang digunakan adalah data sekunder sedangkan analisis data dilakukan secara kualitatif. Hasil penelitian yaitu bahwa kedudukan Komisi Yudisial sangat penting, sehinggasecara struktural kedudukannya diposisikan sederajat dengan Mahkamah Agung dan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Namun demikian� secara fungsionalperannya bersifat penunjang (auxiliary) terhadap lembaga kekuasaan kehakiman. Komisi Yudisial meskipun fungsinya terkait dengan kekuasaan kehakiman tetapi bukan� pelaku kekuasaan kehakiman, melainkan lembaga penegak norma etik (code of ethics) dari hakim. Selain itu Komisi Yudisial juga tidak terlibat dalam hal organisasi, personalia, administrasi dan keuangan para hakim. Hal ini berbeda dengan Komisi Yudisial yang ada di negara Eropa misalnya Belanda. Komisi Yudisial di Belanda (Netherland Council for Judiciary) memiliki kewenangan pada area kebijakan teknis dan pembuatan kebijakan pada bidang peradilan.Komisi Yudisial Belanda dan di Eropa pada umumnya mempunyai kewenangan dalam hal mengelola organisasi, anggaran dan administrasi peradilan termasuk dalam melakukan promosi, mutasi, rekruitmen dan memberikan sanksi terhadap hakim. Mahkamah Agung hanya fokus melaksanakan fungsi peradilan yaitu mengadili

scholarly journals Eksistensi Etika Hakim Dalam Persidangan Peradilan Pidana Guna Mewujudkan Lembaga Peradilan Yang Bersih dari KKN

Wajah Hukum ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 101
Author(s):  
Ririn Oktaviani
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Public Trust ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Legal Institutions ◽  
Selection Mechanism ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
High Integrity ◽  
Internal Supervision

Judges in carrying out their duties and authorities have clear rules. To create a judiciary that is clean from corrupt practices, the performance of judges receives comprehensive and comprehensive supervision. The Supreme Court (MA), as the highest judicial power agency, carries out internal supervision, while external supervision is carried out by the Judicial Professional Honorary Commission of IKAHI and the Judicial Commission (KY). However, the facts show that bribery cases which ensnared judges are increasing and have tarnished legal institutions especially public trust in the justice system in Indonesia. This is interesting because there are still judges who do not comply with the code of ethics for judges as a guideline in carrying out their duties, this shows that the oversight function by the MA and KY has not been able to run properly. The method used is normative juridical. The results obtained state that efforts to overcome public distrust in the judiciary caused by judges who are entangled in corruption cases are by improving the selection mechanism for prospective judges so that judges are selected with professional personality and high integrity. In addition, the need to improve the MA and KY supervisory functions by increasing sanctions for violators of the judge's code of ethics.

scholarly journals Supervisory Function on Judges: Prevent Corruption Context

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Edy Hasmi
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Intellectual Character ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
High Integrity

<p align="justify">The purpose of this research was to determined the effectiveness of the supervision of the Supreme Court judges in Indonesia. Supervision the code of ethics and code of conduct of judges can be seen from the number of public complaints on judges are immoral and detention of judges by the Corruption Eradication Commission. The method used in this research was normative legal research/normative juridical, the data were analyzed descriptively qualitative. The research founded that The Supreme Court’s role in the framework of the supervision of judges has not been effective. This research suggested that judges should have high integrity, visionary, and also understanding for law and social sciences, and also should have the intellectual character, thus judges feel protected by the presence of the Supreme Court.</p>

scholarly journals KEWENANGAN BADAN PENGAWAS PEMILU DALAM PENANGANAN PELANGGARAN ADMINISTRASI DITINJAU DARI PERSPEKTIF SISTEM PERADILAN INDONESIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-85
Author(s):  
Alasman Mpesau
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Supervisory Board ◽  
Electoral System ◽  
General Election ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Religious Courts

In the General Election and Regional Head Election Law, the Election Supervisory Board (Bawaslu) has the authority supervisory to each Election stages, it is the center for law enforcement activities of the Election (Sentra Gakkumdu) to criminal acts and carrying out the judicial functions for investigating, examining, and decided on administrative disputes of General Election and Regional Head Election.  With the Bawaslu’s authority then placed as a super-body institution in the ranks of the Election Management Body, due to its essential role in building a clean and credible electoral system, it also has potential for abuse of power within it. In Law no. 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power has defined state institutions that have the authority to administrate judicial functions. These are the Supreme Court and Judicial Bodies that under its lines of general court, Religious Courts, Military Courts, Administrative Court (PTUN) and the Constitutional Court. The research method is normative juridical, that focuses on the analysis of the laws and regulations on General Election, Regional Head Elections and the Law on Judicial Power. The analytical tool is descriptive analysis, by describing the main issues, an analysis is carried out that was supported by case-approach related to the research. The study concludes that Bawaslu in carrying out judicial functions in its position as a semi-judicial institution has not a hierarchical relationship to the Supreme Court (MA) and the Constitutional Court (MK); however, what does exist is functional relationship.

scholarly journals Role and Place of Higher Specialized Courts in the Judicial System of Ukraine

2020 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-257
Author(s):  
V. V. Chumak
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Legal Documents ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Specialized Courts ◽  
Definition Of

The role and place of higher specialized courts in the judicial system of Ukraine have been studied and determined. The author has studied such main categories as “judicial system of Ukraine”, “judiciary”, “judicial system” and “judicial power”. The judicial system of Ukraine has been established. The normative and legal base of functioning of highest specialized courts of Ukraine has been characterized. The author has provided own definition of the categories “judicial system of Ukraine” and “judicial power of Ukraine”. The author has offered to understand the category of “judicial system of Ukraine” as the totality of all hierarchically structured elements of the system (courts), which are endowed with exclusive competence to administer justice, built on the principles of territoriality and specialization, are defined by law and united by general principles of their organization and activity. In turn, the concept of “judicial power of Ukraine” is defined as the activity of courts (judicial system) to administer justice and to perform their professional duties within the limits and in the manner prescribed by the Constitution and laws of Ukraine in accordance with international and legal documents. It has been determined that highest specialized courts in the judicial system of Ukraine are the Supreme Court on Intellectual Property Issues and the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court. It has been concluded that highest specialized courts in the judicial system of Ukraine play an important role in the holistic mechanism of the entire judicial system, since they are endowed with exclusive competence to consider and decide cases on the merits of certain categories, and their activities are determined at the level of a separate regulatory act, which determines their legal status, and hence their place in the judicial system of Ukraine.

Courts between Democracy and Hybrid Authoritarianism: Evidence from the Venezuelan Supreme Court

2011 ◽  
Vol 36 (04) ◽  
pp. 854-884 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raul A. Sanchez Urribarri
Keyword(s):  
Social Control ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Theoretical Discussion ◽  
Hybrid Regimes ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Comprehensive Intervention ◽  
The Government

This article offers a theoretical discussion about courts in “hybrid regimes” that evolve from formerly democratic countries. The evolution toward authoritarianism typically allows governments more latitude to reduce judicial independence and judicial power. Yet, several reasons, including legitimacy costs, a tradition of using courts for judicial adjudication and social control, and even the use of courts for quenching dissent may discourage rulers from shutting down the judicial contestation arena and encourage them instead to appeal to less overbearing measures. This usually leads to a decline of the judiciary's proclivity to challenge the government, especially in salient cases. To illustrate these dynamics, I discuss the rise and fall of judicial power in Venezuela under Chávez's rule, focusing on the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court. Formerly the most powerful institution in the country's history, the Chamber briefly emerged as an influential actor at the beginning of the regime, but a comprehensive intervention of the judiciary in 2004 further politicized the court and effectively reduced its policy-making role.

The oath of a judge – oath of office and judicial symbol

2021 ◽  
pp. 85-92
Author(s):  
O. Kravchuk ◽  
I. Ostashchuk
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Symbolic Action ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Conscious Choice ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
The Moment ◽  
First Time

The oath of a judge as an oath of office and as an element of judicial symbolism is considered in the article. The oath of a judge belongs to the categories of oaths of office, taken by an official upon taking office. At the same time, it belongs to the judicial oaths used in the justice process and is an element of judicial symbols. The oath of a judge as an oath of office symbolizes the endowment of a judge as an official by the state (judicial) power, the moment of his acquisition of powers (it is the inauguration ceremony), and the duty of a judge as an official to perform his duties properly. The oath of a judge as a judicial symbol represents a public and solemn obligation of the judge to exercise a fair trial in all its manifestations, including: independence and impartiality of the court, adversarial proceedings, equality of arms, and the rule of law. The judge takes the oath in a solemn atmosphere in the presence of senior officials (in Ukraine – in the presence of the President of Ukraine). It is an important ritual – a symbol of giving a person judicial power. The oath itself is a symbolic action of conscious choice of responsible and impartial observance of the law in the professional functions of realization of the rule of law for the good of all people. The coronavirus pandemic has shown that gathering a large number of people in one room can be problematic, so the oath ceremony was held even outdoors. It is stated that holding a ceremony in one of the judicial bodies, for example, in the premises of the Supreme Court or (subject to quarantine restrictions) in the territory of the Supreme Court may symbolize the independence of the judiciary and each judge from other branches of power. The peculiarity of the oath of a judge in Ukraine is its one-time nature. It should be taken only by a person first appointed to the position of a judge. In case of an appointment or transfer to another court, the judge shall not take the oath again. In this aspect, the oath of a judge is similar to the oath of a civil servant, which is taken only by persons recruited for the first time.

Judicial Power in a Political World

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin Crowe
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Political Rhetoric ◽  
Democratic Politics ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
The Political ◽  
Institution Building ◽  
Political Arena ◽  
Federal Judiciary ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Relationship

This concluding chapter synthesizes the book's main findings about the architectonic politics of judicial institution building and contextualizes them within contemporary debates. It also reflects upon the lessons of the more than 200-year historical lineage of the institutional judiciary for our understanding of judicial power in America. More specifically, it considers the place of the federal judiciary in America's past and future in empirical and normative terms, respectively. It argues that both political rhetoric and academic exegesis about the Supreme Court embody a fundamentally incorrect presumption about the judiciary being external to politics, and that such presumption leads to a series of misconceptions about the relationship between judicial power and democratic politics. The chapter offers a conception that not only locates the judicial branch squarely within the political arena but also places substantially greater emphasis on its cooperation rather than conflict with other actors and institutions in that arena.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document