ANALISIS YURIDIS PENDIRIAN DAN PEMBUBARAN ORGANISASI MASYARAKAT

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-27
Author(s):  
M. KHAIRUL WARDI
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Community Organizations ◽  
Dissolution Mechanism ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Before And After ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

The spirit of building a nation began before and after Indonesia's independence. One of the ways is by establishing a Social Organization, the provisions of the Law on Mass Organizations under the Staatsblad 1870 Number 64 concerning Legal Entities (Rechtspersoonlijkhied van Vereenigingen) which were established before the Proclamation of Independence of the Republic of Indonesia and consistently maintaining the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia. as a national asset and do not need to register in accordance with the provisions of this Law. Organizations are required to have AD and ART to be used as guidelines in carrying out organizational activities, ratification as a Association Legal Entity issued by the Minister of Law and Human Rights. CBOs are prohibited from spreading teachings and actions that are contrary to Pancasila. So that Law Number 17 of 2013 concerning Mass Organizations is no longer sufficient, finally the government issued Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 2 of 2017 to explain more broadly about prohibited teachings / understandings. The research method used is normative research, with the focus of the study being on the statutory approach to the establishment and dissolution of Community Organizations and reviewing the Supreme Court Decisions related to the establishment and dissolution of CSOs by taking case studies of NW and HTI decisions. The purpose of this study is to find out how the procedures for establishing community organizations and the dissolution mechanism of CSOs. Furthermore, conducting a case study based on the Decision of the Supreme Court Number 37K / TUN / 2016 concerning the establishment of Nahdlatul Wathan (NW) and Decision Number 27K / TUN / 2019 concerning the dissolution of the Indonesian Hizb ut-Tahrir Association (HTI).

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 Rechtsvacuum Phenomenon in Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 51 of 2020 related to Passport Renewal Period to 10 Years

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-58
Author(s):  
Fachrizza Sidi Pratama
Keyword(s):  
State Government ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
The State ◽  
Government Regulations ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
Renewal Period ◽  
Law Regulation ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Legislation is one of the legal products issued by the state government component. In this case, the laws and regulations include the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia year 1945, the Decree of the People's Consultative Assembly, The Law / Regulation of the Government In lieu of Laws, Government Regulations, Presidential Regulations, and Local Regulations. As for its application, the rules have levels in the arrangement, where there are sections that explain macro and its derivatives that are narrowing down to the implementing regulations. The levels of the rules must be complete because each of them has its own function.  Meanwhile, in this journal, there will be a discussion on the phenomenon of legal vacancies in the case study of Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 51 of 2020 related to the Period of Extending Passports to 10 Years, where in the issuance of government regulations have not been included implementing regulations that will regulate how the implementation of government regulations in the field.  

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

Analisis Pemberian Wasiat Wajibah terhadap Ahli Waris Beda Agama Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 331 K/Ag/2018

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 172
Author(s):  
Alip Pamungkas Raharjo ◽  
Elok Fauzia Dwi Putri
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Before And After ◽  
The Republic ◽  
A Share

In Article 171 letter (c) Instruction of the President of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1 of 1991 concerning Compilation of Islamic Law affirms that the rights of non muslim heirs to the inheritance of Islamic heirs do not obtain inheritance from the inheritor's inheritance. However, in its development because it felt unfair, the Supreme Court through The Supreme Court Decision Number 368.K / AG / 1995 provided a way for joint cooperation of different inheritance through a wasiat wajibah. But in its development, this provision was changed again by a landmark decision from the Supreme Court, namely through the Decision of the Supreme Court Number 331 K / AG / 2018 because there was a change in the value of justice in the community. The research method used normative research with constitutional approach, conceptual approach and case approach. This study aims to explain the rights of non muslim heirs to the inheritance of Islamic heirs before and after the Decision of the Supreme Court Number 331 K / AG / 2018. The results showed that prior to the Supreme Court Decision Number 331 K / AG / 2018, heirs of non muslim religions were given a share of inheritance in the form of a wasiat wajibah for ¾ of the inheritance inheritance. Post the Decision of the Supreme Court Number 331 K / AG / 2018, the amount of wasiat wajibah will change to ¼ from the inheritor's inheritance. 

scholarly journals PEMBUBARAN ORMAS “RADIKAL” DALAM PERSEPEKTIF PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN (Kajian Khusus Perppu No. 02 Tahun 2017)

Nuansa ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Imam Mahdi
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Community Organizations ◽  
The State ◽  
Public Organization ◽  
Legal Action ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Pros And Cons ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

The Government Regulation on Law Enforcement (Perppu), has the same  legal force as the law, but is tem- porary because it must  obtain approval by the Parliament. Exit of Perppu No. 2 Year 2017 on Amendment to Law no. 17Year 2003 on Public  Organization. The legal basis  of the President to issue  the Perppu is stipulated in Article 22 of the1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, essentially the Perppu is issued because of the urgency of the matter, meaning that  if not issued by the Perppu, the government can not take legal action for the interest of the State. In fact, this Perppu is used to dissolve community organizations, especially Hizbur Tahrir Indonesia (HTI) which is considered by the government to deviate from Pancasila ideology and endanger the integrity of NKRI. As a result, there are pros and cons against Perppu No. 2 Year 2017. .

scholarly journals The Relevance of Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2020 in Efforts of State Losses Refund through Restorative Justice

Corruptio ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-146
Author(s):  
Niko Jaya Kusuma ◽  
Firganefi Firganefi ◽  
Muhammad Farid
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Main Element ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Literature Reviews ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

The government has moved quickly to find a legal breakthrough related to reducing corruption in Indonesia. One of the efforts made by the government is through the Supreme Court to eradicate corruption is the enactment of Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2020 concerning Guidelines for the Criminalization of Articles 2 and 3 of the Law on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes. The consideration is that the imposition of a crime must be carried out with due regard for the certainty and proportionality of punishment to realize justice based on Pancasila and the Republic of Indonesia's 1945 Constitution. The objectives of the Supreme Court Regulation prioritize victim’s losses to be recovered. Moreover, the regulation proportional benefits in imposing penalties on criminal cases is compatible with the Restorative Justice approach. The restorative justice process is expected to be a legal breakthrough in restoring state finances, with dealing with Criminal Corruption Cases focusing on efforts to restore state finances as a whole rather than just prosecuting the perpetrators. Thus, the purpose of this research is to determine how relevant Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2020 are to efforts to recover state losses through restorative justice. This research employs both a normative and an empirical legal approach. Data were gathered through literature reviews and field studies and analyzed qualitatively. The present study confirmed the author's thoughts about the relevancies of Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2020 to recover state losses through restorative justice as Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2020 play a role as a law enforcement's main element as a legal substance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document