DEKONSTRUKSI PENGAWASAN PERATURAN DAERAH SETELAH BERLAKUNYA UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 11 TAHUN 2020 TENTANG CIPTA KERJA

Constitutional Court Decision of Number 137/PUU-XIII/2015and Decision Number 56/PUU-XIV/2016 which state that theauthority of the Minister of Home Affairs and the Governor asthe representative of the central government in cancelingProvincial Regulations, District Regulation/City Regulation,Governor Regulation, and Regent Regulation/Regulation ofMayor was inconstitutional. So only the Supreme Court has theauthority to revoke Provincial Regulations, DistrictRegulation/City Regulations, Governor Regulation, and RegentRegulation/Regulation of Mayor. This analysis makes use of thelegal juridical normative research method. The results showthat in a state of unity it is appropriate that higher levels ofgovernment are given the authority to supervise theregulations set in the regions. The supervision can beimplemented by conducting such a guidance to the regionthrough the strengthening of executive preview or legal normreview before it is legally binding in general

Download Full-text

Kedudukan Peraturan Daerah Yang Dibatalkan Oleh Keputusan Menteri Dalam Negeri Setelah Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 137/PUU-XIII/2015

Syiah Kuala Law Journal ◽

10.24815/sklj.v3i1.12158 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 3 (1) ◽

pp. 95-113

Author(s):

Rahmat Qadri Nasrun ◽

Husni Djalil ◽

Efendi Efendi

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Research Method ◽

Central Government ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Research Data ◽

Court Decision ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Regional Government ◽

Legal Research ◽

The Supreme Court

Pada tahun 2016 Menteri Dalam Negeri membatalkan 3.143 Peraturan Daerah bermasalah. Kemudian pada tahun 2017 Mahkamah Konstitusi mengeluarkan sebuah Putusan yang mencabut kewenangan Menteri Dalam Negeri untuk membatalkan Peraturan Daerah. Akan tetapi masih ada Pemerintah Daerah yang melaksanakan Peraturan Daerah yang dibatalkan oleh Menteri Dalam Negeri sebelum keluarnya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Penelitian ini bertujuan, untuk menganalisis kekuatan eksekutorial Keputusan Menteri Dalam Negeri yang membatalkan peraturan daerah sebelum Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi serta untuk menganalisis kedudukan peraturan daerah yang dibatalkan oleh Keputusan Menteri Dalam Negeri yang masih dilaksanakan oleh Pemerintah Daerah setelah Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif. Sumber data penelitian adalah data sekunder yang terdiri dari bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder dan bahan hukum tertier. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pertama. Menteri Dalam Negeri masih dapat melaksanakan Keputusan untuk membatalkan Peraturan Daerah karena Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tidak berlaku surut, namun idealnya yang lebih berhak membatalkan Peraturan Daerah adalah Mahkamah Agung. Kedua, Kedudukan Peraturan Daerah yang dibatalkan oleh Keputusan Menteri Dalam Negeri yang masih dilaksanakan oleh Pemerintah Daerah setelah dikeluarkannya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi maka Peraturan Daerah tersebut tidak langsung batal karena ada mekanisme yang harus dilakukan yaitu pencabutan. Selama belum ada pencabutan, maka Peraturan Daerah dimaksud tetap ada tetapi tidak bisa dilaksanakan. Disarankan kepada Pemerintah Pusat agar merevisi Undang-Undang Nomor 23 Tahun 2014 khususnya pasal yang mengatur tentang pembatalan Peraturan Daerah dan apabila mengeluarkan suatu peraturan perundang-undangan harus berpedoman pada hierarki peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku saat itu.In 2016 the Minister of Home Affairs canceled 3,143 problematic Regional Regulations. Then in 2017 the Constitutional Court issued a Decision revoking the authority of the Minister of Home Affairs to cancel the Regional Regulation. However, there are still Regional Governments who carry out Regional Regulations that have been canceled by the Minister of Home Affairs before the decision of the Constitutional Court is issued. This study aims to analyze the executorial power of the Decree of the Minister of Home Affairs which overturned regional regulations before the Constitutional Court Decision and to analyze the position of regional regulations which were canceled by the Decree of the Minister of Home Affairs which was still implemented by the Regional Government after the Constitutional Court Decision. The research method used is normative legal research. The source of research data is secondary data consisting of primary legal materials, secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials. The results of the study indicate that : first, The Minister of Home Affairs can still implement the Decision to cancel Regional Regulations because the Constitutional Court Decision does not apply retroactively, but ideally the more entitled to cancel Regional Regulations is the Supreme Court. Second, the position of the Regional Regulation which was canceled by the Decree of the Minister of Home Affairs which is still carried out by the Regional Government after the issuance of the Constitutional Court Decision, the Regional Regulation is not immediately canceled because there is a mechanism that must be done, namely revocation. As long as there has been no revocation, then the Regional Regulation in question still exists but cannot be implemented. It is recommended to the Central Government to revise Act. No. 23 Year 2014 specifically the articles governing the cancellation of Regional Regulations and when issuing a law and regulation must be guided by the hierarchy of legislation in force at that time.

Download Full-text

Pengujian Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang

10.31219/osf.io/z289x ◽

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

Download Full-text

PENJARA TERHADAP DOKTER DALAM PERSPEKTIF MENGIKATNYA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DAN PEMIDANAAN INTEGRATIF

Jurnal Yudisial ◽

10.29123/jy.v10i1.42 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. 59

Author(s):

Warih Anjari

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Medical Profession ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Court Decision ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Court Ruling ◽

Binding Force ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Negative Impacts ◽

Sentencing Theory

ABSTRAKKekuatan mengikat putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi bersifat final dan mengikat. Namun Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 4/PUU-V/2007 tidak ditaati oleh Putusan Nomor 1110 K/Pid.Sus/2012. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi telah menganulir ancaman pidana penjara dalam Pasal 75 ayat (1), Pasal 76, dan Pasal 79 Undang-Undang Nomor 29 Tahun 2004 tentang Praktik Kedokteran. Putusan Mahkamah Agung tetap menjatuhkan pidana penjara terhadap dokter yang melanggar pasal tersebut. Kondisi ini menimbulkan ketidaksesuaian antara kekuatan mengikat putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dan tujuan penjatuhan pidana yang integratif berdasarkan Pancasila. Masalah dalam tulisan ini adalah bagaimanakah implikasi Putusan Nomor 1110 K/Pid.Sus/2012 dikaitkan dengan kekuatan mengikat Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi? Dan bagaimanakah implikasi penjatuhan pidana penjara bagi dokter yang tercantum dalam Putusan Nomor 1110 K/ Pid.Sus/2012 dikaitkan dengan teori tujuan pemidanaan integratif? Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam tulisan ini adalah metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan kasus. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi memiliki sifat erga ormes sehingga harus diikuti oleh Mahkamah Agung. Pidana penjara terhadap dokter yang tidak menggunakan izin praktik tidak dapat mencapai tujuan pemidanaan integratif. Akibatnya pelayanan kesehatan bagi masyarakat tidak terlayani, dan merugikan profesi dokter. Kesimpulannya adalah putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tidak mempunyai kekuatan mengikat sehingga menjadi tidak efektif dan tujuan pemidanaan integratif berdasarkan Pancasila tidak tercapai.Kata kunci: pidana penjara, kekuatan putusan, tujuan pemidanaan integratif.ABSTRACTThe binding force of the Constitutional Court ruling is final. However, the Supreme Court Decision Number 1110 K/Pid.Sus/2012 does not abide by the Constitutional Court Decision Number 4/PUU-V/2007. The Constitutional Court Decision has annulled the imprisonment penalties in Article 75 paragraph (1), Article 76, Article 79 of Law Number 29 of 2004 concerning Medical Practices. The Supreme Court in its decision imposed the sanction of imprisonment on the doctors violating the aforementioned articles. This condition lead to such a discrepancy between the final and binding decision of the Constitutional Court and the integrated purposes of sentencing under Pancasila. Formulation of the problems in this analysis meets some points on how the implication of the Supreme Court Decision Number 1110 K/Pid.Sus/2012 regarding the binding force of the Constitutional Court Decision; and how the implication of the imposition of imprisonment sanction for a list of doctors stated in the Supreme Court Decision Number 1110 K/Pid.Sus/2012 in terms of integrated objective of sentencing theory. The research method is a normative juridical by case-based approach. The nature of the decision of the Constitutional Court is erga omnes, that obliges the Supreme Court to act upon. The sanction of imprisonment against the doctors with no consent practices cannot reach the integrated purpose of sentencing. As a consequence, the health services to communities are abandoned and this bring negative impacts on medical profession. To be brief, the decision of the Constitutional Court is considered futile with no binding force, accordingly the integrated purpose of sentencing under Pancasila could not be achieved.Keywords: imprisonment, binding force of ruling, integrated purpose of sentencing.

Download Full-text

IDEAS FOR STRENGTHENING SUPREME COURT JUDICIAL REVIEW AUTHORITY IN REVIEW OF REGIONAL REGULATIONS

JURNAL HUKUM DAN PERADILAN ◽

10.25216/jhp.9.3.2020.505-522 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (3) ◽

pp. 505

Author(s):

Muh Risnain

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Court Decision ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

The Public ◽

Procedural Law ◽

Preliminary Examination ◽

Legal Implications ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Legal Procedures

AbstractThe problem of judicial review of regional regulations in the Supreme Court is a serious academic and practical issue that needs to be resolved after the issuance of the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 137 / PUU-XIII / 2015. There are two problems in this paper, first, the legal implications of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 137 / PUU-XIII / 2015 on institutional and legal procedures for judicial review of regional regulations in the Supreme Court, secondly, how is the concept of the Supreme Court judicial review carried out through renewal of procedural law Trial Judicial Review in the Supreme Court? Based on the discussion above, we can conclude two things, first, the legal implications of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 137 / PUU-XIII / 2015 on the institutional and legal procedures for judicial review of regional regulations in the Supreme Court are the stronger and increasing authority of judicial review in Supreme Court. This decision ended the dualism of review of local regulations from judicial review by the Supreme Court and executive review of regional regulations by the Ministry of Home Affairs to only a judicial review by the Supreme Court, also potentially increasing the number of cases of judicial review in the Supreme Court. Second, the concept of the implementation of a judicial review by the Supreme Court is carried out through legal renewal of the judicial review proceedings in the Supreme Court by including several important substances, related to hearings that are open to the public, the existence of a preliminary examination, hearing, verdict and decision making that are more open and fair.Keywords: Regional Regulation, Judicial Review, and Reformation ABSTRAKProblem judicial review Perda di Mahkamah Agung menjadi persoalan akademik dan praktikal serius yang perlu dipecahkan pascakeluarnya putusan Mahkamah konstitusi Nomor 137/PUU-XIII/2015. Terdapat dua masalah dalam tulisan ini, pertama, implikasi hukum Putusan Mahkamah konstitusi Nomor 137/PUU-XIII/2015 terhadap kelembagaan dan hukum acara judicial review perda di mahkamah agung, kedua, bagaimanakah konsep pelaksanaan judicial review perda oleh mahkamah agung dilakukan melalui pembaharuan hukum acara persidangan judicial review di mahkamah agung?. Berdasarkan pembahasan di atas maka dapat disimpulkan dua hal , pertama, implikasi hukum Putusan Mahkamah konstitusi Nomor 137/PUU-XIII/2015 terhadap kelembagaan dan hukum acara judicial review perda di mahkamah agung adalah semakin kuat dan meningkatnya kewenangan judicial review di mahakamah agung. Putusan ini mengakhiri dualisme review perda dari judicial review oleh MA dan executive review perda oleh kemendagri menjadi hanya judicial review oleh Mahkamah Agung, juga berpotensi meningkatkan jumlah perkara judicial review perda di mahkamah agung. Kedua, konsep pelaksanaan judicial review perda oleh mahkamah agung dilakukan melalui pembaharuan hukum acara persidangan judicial review di mahkamah agung dengan memasukan beberapa substansi penting, terkait sidang yang terbuka untuk umum, adanya proses pemeriksaan pendahuluan, pemeriksaan persidangan, pembuktian dan pengambilan putusan yang lebih terbuka dan fair.Kata Kunci : Peaturan Daerah, JudicialReview, dan Pembaharuan.

Download Full-text

Eksistensi Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia dalam Menciptakan Hakim Agung Yang Berkualitas dan Berintegritas

Kalabbirang Law Journal ◽

10.35877/454ri.kalabbirang15 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 1 (2) ◽

pp. 22-34

Author(s):

Muslim Mamulai

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Research Methods ◽

Research Method ◽

Ad Hoc ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Legal Research ◽

High Quality ◽

Court Judge ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Republic

Kajian ini untuk mengkaji eksistensi Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesa dalam menciptakan hakim agung yang berkualitas dan berintegritas. Metode peneltia yang digunaka menggunakan metode peneltian hukum normatif. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa Kewenangan Komisi Yudisial sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 24B ayat (1) UUD 1945 mengalami dinamika dan perubahan dalam penafsiran baik pada tingkat legislasi di DPR, ajudikasi di Mahkamah Konstitusi dan Mahkamah Agung, maupun pada tingkat regulasi di Mahkamah Agung dan Komisi Yudisial.Eksistensi Komisi Yudisial mengusulkan pengangkatan hakim agung telah mengalami perluasan makna mencakup hakim ad hoc di Mahkamah Agung serta penguatan dengan dihapuskan kewenangan DPR untuk memilih calon hakim agung dan hanya menyetujui atau tidak menyetujui calon hakim agung usulan Komisi Yudisial. This study is to study the existence of the Judicial Commission of the Republic of Indonesia in creating high-quality judges with integrity. The research method used uses normative legal research methods. The results showed that the authority of the Judicial Commission as referred to in Article 24B paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution experienced dynamics and changes in interpretation both at the legislative level in the DPR, adjudication in the Constitutional Court and Supreme Court, as well as in the Supreme Court and Judicial Commission. The existence of the Judicial Commission proposing the appointment of a Supreme Court judge has broadened the meaning including ad hoc judges in the Supreme Court and strengthened by abolishing the authority of the DPR to elect candidate judges and only approving or not approving candidates for the proposed Judicial Commission.

Download Full-text

Menimbang Kedudukan Majelis Kehormatan Mahkamah Konstitusi Setelah Terbitnya Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2020

Jurnal Konstitusi ◽

10.31078/jk1749 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 17 (4) ◽

pp. 899

Author(s):

Zuhad Aji Firmantoro

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

State Government ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Court Decision ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Material Research ◽

Representative Government ◽

Conceptual Approach ◽

Constitutional State ◽

The Supreme Court

AbstrakPenelitian ini membahas tentang penafsiran Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2011 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 yang putusannya mengabulkan sebagian permohonan pemohon berupa perubahan terhadap komposisi anggota Majelis Kehormatan Mahkamah Konstitusi, yakni Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 49/PUU-IX/2011. Ada dua permasalahan yang diteliti dalam penelitian ini, yaitu Pertama, apakah masuknya unsur DPR, Pemerintah dan Mahkamah Agung bertentangan dengan Pasal 1 ayat (3) dan Pasal 24 ayat (1) dan ayat (2) UUD 1945? Kedua, apakah implikasi putusan pembatalan Pasal 27A ayat (2) huruf C, D, dan E terhadap mekanisme saling kontrol (chekcs and balance) antar cabang kekuasaan negara (eksekutif, legislatif dan yudikatif) di Indonesia? Metode penelitian yang digunakan yakni penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan konseptual, selain itu, dikaji dengan studi kasus yang berkaitan dengan materi yang dikaji. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah, pertama: berdasarkan kajian Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 49/PUU-IX/2011 yang mengabulkan sebagian permohonan pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2011 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945, Mahkamah Konstitusi menyatakan bahwa pembuat undang-undang telah membahayakan kemerdekaan kekuasaan kehakiman sebagaimana diatur dalam pasal 1 ayat (3) dan Pasal 24 ayat (1) dan ayat (2) UUD 1945 dengan memasukan unsur Pemerintah, DPR dan Mahkamah Agung dalam keanggotaan Majelis Kehormatan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Kedua, Putusan tersebut berimplikasi pada keanggotaan Majelis Kehormatan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang terdiri dan terbatas atas 2 (dua) unsur yaitu Mahkamah Konstitusi dan Komisi Yudisial. Karena itu utusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tersebut dianggap telah berhasil menjaga berlakunya asas check and balance antar 3 (tiga) cabang kekuasaan (eksekutif, legislatif dan yudikatif) dalam sistem ketatanegaraan indonesia.AbstractThis research elaborates the Constitutional Court interpretation within Decision No. 49/PUU-IX/2011 on judicial review of Law No. 8 of 2011 on amendments of Law No. 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court which its decision has granted mostly the petitioner’s petitions to change the Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court members composition. There are at least two examined issues in this study, they are: Firstly, does the addition of elements House of Representative, Government and the Supreme Court contradict Article 1 paragraph (3) and Article 24 paragraph (1) and (2) of the 1945 Constitution? And secondly, what is the implication of the decision to repeal Article 27A paragraph (2) letters C, D, and E for check and balance between three branches of state government (executive, legislative and judicial) in Indonesia? This research is normative legal research that uses a conceptual approach, also reviewed with case studies related to material research. The results show; Firstly, based on the study to Indonesian Constitutional Court Decision No. 49/PUU-IX/2011 which accepted most of the petitioner’s petitions on judicial review of Law No. 8 of 2011, the Constitutional Court stated that the addition of elements House of Representative, Government and the Supreme Court as members in the Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court then legislators have endangered the freedom of judicial power as regulated Article 1 paragraph (3) and Article 24 paragraph (1) and (2) the 1945 Constitution. Secondly, this decision has an impact on the members of the Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court which only consists of two elements, namely the constitutional court and the judicial commission. Therefore, the Constitutional Court Decision is considered successful in keeping the principle of check and balance between three branches of state government in the Indonesian constitutional state system.

Download Full-text

PUTUSAN PENINJAUAN KEMBALI PERKARA PIDANA SEBAGAI NOVUM DALAM PENINJAUAN KEMBALI PERKARA PERDATA

Jurnal Yudisial ◽

10.29123/jy.v12i1.327 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 12 (1) ◽

pp. 105

Author(s):

ALI MARWAN HSB

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Research Method ◽

Research Result ◽

Court Decision ◽

Criminal Case ◽

Case Review ◽

Literature Research ◽

Civil Case ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Civil Cases

ABSTRAKUndang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2001 tentang Merek mengatur bahwa untuk penyelesaian sengketa atau pelanggaran merek dapat ditempuh melalui dua alternatif penyelesaian, yaitu dengan mengajukan gugatan ke pengadilan niaga (secara perdata) dan diadukan kepada penyidik untuk diselesaikan secara pidana. Kedua penyelesaian inilah yang ditempuh sekaligus oleh GG melawan GB. Kasus ini kemudian sampai pada upaya hukum luar biasa yaitu peninjauan kembali. Dalam peninjauan kembali perkara perdata, pihak GG mengajukan putusan peninjauan kembali perkara pidana sebagai novum. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, dapat dirumuskan permasalahan dalam tulisan ini adalah: apakah putusan peninjauan kembali perkara pidana dapat dijadikan novum dalam peninjauan kembali perkara perdata? Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam tulisan ini adalah metode penelitian yuridis normatif atau metode penelitian kepustakaan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa jika dikaji dari alasan pengajuan peninjauan kembali yang diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 1985 tentang Mahkamah Agung, suatu putusan pengadilan dapat dijadikan alasan dalam permohonan peninjauan kembali, apabila ada pertentangan antara putusan yang satu dengan yang lain. Pertentangan itu harus antara putusan oleh peradilan yang sama atau sama tingkatan. Pengajuan putusan peninjauan kembali perkara pidana menjadi novum dalam peninjauan kembali perkara perdata atau sebaliknya, tidak dapat dibenarkan.Kata kunci: peninjauan kembali, pidana, perdata, novum. ABSTRACT Law Number 15 of 2001 concerning Trademark stipulates that resolution of disputes or violations of brands can be taken through two alternative ways, namely filing a lawsuit to the Commercial Court (civil) and secondly filing a complaint with the investigator for a criminal settlement. These two solutions were taken at the same time by both parties, GG against GB. This case was then up to the extraordinary request for review. In the review of civil cases, GG filed a decision on a criminal case review as novum. Based on this, the problems outlined in this analysis is whether the decision of a criminal case review can be made novum in reviewing a civil case. The method used is a normative juridical research method or literature research method. As stipulated in Law Number 14 of 1985 concerning the Supreme Court, pertaining to the reasoning of filing an extraordinary request for case review, the research result shows that a court decision can be used as an excuse to file a case review, provided that there is conflict between one decision and another. Filing a criminal case review decision as novum in civil case review or vice versa cannot be justified. Keywords: case review, criminal, civil, novum.

Download Full-text

Analisis Yuridis terhadap Kasus Gugatan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum atas Ketidakabsahan Peralihan Hak Milik Benda Bergerak (Studi Kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1081/K/PDT/2018)

Kosmik Hukum ◽

10.30595/kosmikhukum.v20i1.6433 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

pp. 21

Author(s):

Fathalya Laksana

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Research Method ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Civil Code ◽

Court Decision ◽

Analysis Method ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Analytical Research ◽

The Law

The legal requirements are regulated in Article 1320 of the Civil Code (KUHPerdata). If the valid conditions of the promise are not fulfilled, then the law that results is that the agreement can be canceled or null and void. In the Court's practice contained in the Supreme Decision Number 1081K / PDT / 2018, there was a sale and purchase agreement between the Plaintiff's husband and the Defendant, the sale and purchase agreement was made by the Plaintiff's partner without the consent of the Plaintiff as his legal wife. Supreme Court Decision No. 1081K / PDT / 2018 stated that the sale and purchase agreement was invalid and null and void. Apart from that, in its decision, the Defendant's UN Supreme Court had committed an illegal act. The research method used is a normative juridical approach using secondary data obtained from literature studies, namely statutory regulations, legal theories, and the opinions of leading legal scholars. This research uses descriptive analytical research specifications that describe the regulations that are in accordance with legal theories that oversee the implementation practices of the problems under study. The data analysis method used is qualitative normative method. Based on the research results, it can be denied that the sale and purchase agreement in the Supreme Court Decision Number 1081K / PDT / 2018 is not legally valid. The agreement does not fulfill the validity requirements of the agreement in Article 1320 of the Civil Code, namely halal skills and causes because it violates Article 36 paragraph (2) of the Marriage Law No. 1 of 1974 resulting in the sale and purchase agreement to be null and void.Keywords: Buying and Selling, Acts against the Law, Agreement, Marriage, Collective Property

Download Full-text

Problematika Pengujian Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Mahkamah Agung ( Kajian Terhadap Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 65 P/HUM/2018)

SASI ◽

10.47268/sasi.v27i1.417 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 27 (1) ◽

pp. 61

Author(s):

Suparto Suparto

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Court Decision ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Stage Process ◽

Legal Consequence ◽

Election Commission ◽

Legal Implication ◽

Laws And Regulations

The Supreme Court (MA) decided that candidates for members of the Regional Representative Council (DPD) from political party administrators for the 2019 Election were still allowed, even though previously the Constitutional Court (MK) had banned it (Decision No. This conflict is due to differences in interpreting the timing of the implementation of the ongoing 2019 Election stage process. The Constitutional Court stated that the decision was enforced since the 2019 Election and this was not retroactive. Because it is still at the Provisional Candidate List (DCS) stage, so it is possible to change regulations. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court considers that the Constitutional Court's decision must be enforced after the 2019 Election or apply in the future (prospective), because the stages have been running, so that changes in requirements can be made The legal implication that occurs is that there is legal uncertainty for the General Election Commission (KPU) to follow which decision. To solve this problem can be used the doctrine of validity (enforceability of norms). The existence of a hierarchy of legal products being tested and a basis for testing certainly has a legal consequence of the existence of a hierarchy of norm validity in the decisions of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. When there is a conflict between the Supreme Court decision and the Constitutional Court, the verdict with the basis and object of examination in the hierarchy of laws and regulations that is higher, namely the Constitutional Court decision, has a higher validity than the Supreme Court decision. So that problems like this do not exist anymore, testing of laws and regulations should only be carried out by one institution, namely the Constitutional Court.

Download Full-text

Refleksi Konstitusionalitas Pengawasan Peraturan Daerah Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 137/PUU-XIII/2015

Jurnal Konstitusi ◽

10.31078/jk1629 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 16 (2) ◽

pp. 391

Author(s):

Firdaus Firdaus

Keyword(s):

Local Government ◽

Supreme Court ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Central Government ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Legal Standing ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Government ◽

And Function ◽

The Relationship

Peraturan Daerah (Perda) sebagai produk hukum pemerintahan daerah untuk mengatur dan memerintah sendiri sebagai manifestasi otonomi, tetapi dalam praktiknya sering kali dihadapkan dengan penundaan atau pembatalan akibat fungsi pengawasan preventif atau represif oleh Pemerintah. Melalui Putusan Nomor 137/PUU-XIII/2015, Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) meneguhkan fungsi pengawasan preventif dan membatalkan fungsi pengawasan represif dengan harapan: pertama mengakhiri dilema konstitusional fungsi Pengawasan Pemerintah terhadap Perda; kedua, memperkuat otonomi daerah; dan ketiga, meneguhkan pengujian perda sebagai kompetensi Mahkamah Agung (MA). Namun hal tersebut justru menciptakan dikotomi baru, baik terkait hubungan Pemerintah Pusat dengan pemerintahan daerah maupun dalam memaknai fungsi pengawasan represif dihubungkan dengan kompetensi MA menguji peraturan perundang-undangan di bawah undang-undang terhadap undang-undang. Bentuk dikotomi baru yang dimaksud; pertama, merevitalisasi instrumen sentralisme; dan kedua mereduksi otonomi dan fungsi kekuasaan Pemerintah dengan karakteristik yang bersifat aktif, sepihak (bersegi satu) dalam mengawasi dan memastikan pelaksanaan undangundang. Dimensi konstitusional yang harus dipastikan, bahwa pelaksanaan fungsi pengawasan represif terhadap Perda memberi kedudukan hukum bagi Pemerintah Daerah otonom untuk dapat mengajukan permohonan pengujian kepada MA.Local Regulation (Perda) as a legal product of local government is to regulate and govern itself as a manifestation of autonomy. Yet, in practice it is often confronted with delays or cancellations due to the Government's preventive or repressive supervision functions. Through Decision Number 137 / PUU-XIII / 2015, the Constitutional Court (MK) affirmed the function of preventive supervision and canceled the repressive supervision function in the hope of: first, ending the constitutional dilemma of the Government Oversight function on Local Regulations; second, strengthening local autonomy; and third, confirm the perda review as Supreme Court (MA) competency. However, this actually creates a new dichotomy, both in relation to the relationship between the Central Government and the local government and in interpreting the repressive monitoring function associated with the MA competency in examining the legislation under the regulations toward the statute. The form of the new dichotomy in intended; firstly, revitalize the instrument of centralism; and secondly reducing the autonomy and function of the Government's power with active, unilateral (onesided) characteristics in supervising and ensuring the implementation of the statute. The constitutional dimension that must be ensured is that the implementation of the repressive oversight function of the Local Regulation gives a legal standing for the autonomous local Government to be able to submit an application for judicial review to the Supreme Court.

Download Full-text