scholarly journals Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi Menjadi Objek Hak Angket Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 36/PUU-XV/2017 Dan Undang-Undang MD3)

SASI ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Paman Nurlette
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
State Institution ◽  
The State ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Budget ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Two Sides ◽  
System Today

The style of building our constitutional legal system today is very varied, it has implications for the shifting functions and rights of the State organs including the State organs of the Republic of Indonesia House of Representatives. To understand the conception of the functions and rights of the organs of the Republic of Indonesia Representative Council (DPR RI), it is seen as two sides of a coin (two sides of one coin). The DPR RI's inquiry right is a supervision that must be carried out on policies implemented by the executive. The KPK is an organ that is within the executive family, because it carries out investigations, investigations and prosecutions of corruption cases, such as those carried out by the Prosecutors' Office and the Police. Thus if the KPK is referred to as part of the judiciary. The task of investigation, investigation and prosecution is the task of the executive, not the legislative and judiciary. In addition, the KPK has been an institution that uses the State budget, so it should be overseen by the DPR. if the DPR cannot exercise the right to question the KPK on the grounds of independence. The reason is, it is not right to refuse the right to question the KPK. With the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) in the main essence of the decision which positions the KPK in institutions that are in the realm of power, the executive for carrying out the task of investigation, investigation and prosecution in corruption, which is actually the same as the authority of the police and prosecutors. The KPK is a state institution that is within the executive power cluster, so the KPK can be the object of using the DPR's questionnaire right as the people's representative who carries out the supervisory function. But the use of the questionnaire right by the DPR cannot be applied in the case that the KPK is carrying out its investigative, investigative and prosecution tasks. This means that the KPK cannot be carried out while the KPK is carrying out its duties.

scholarly journals POLITIK HUKUM KEWENANGAN KONSTITUSIONAL DEWAN PERWAKILAN DAERAH DALAM PROSES LEGISLASI PASCA PUTUSAN MK NOMOR 92/PUU-X/2012

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 365
Author(s):  
Anna Triningsih
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
State Institution ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Historical Approach ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Laws And Regulations

<p>Undang-Undang Nomor 17 Tahun 2014 tentang Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah, Dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah (UU MD3) pasca putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) dinilai memiliki problem substantif/materil akibat materi muatannya bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 (UUD NRI 1945), yang mengakibatkan kerugian konstitusional terhadap Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPD), meliputi dikuranginya kewenangan DPD untuk dapat mengajukan (Rancangan Undang-Undang) RUU, dikuranginya kewenangan DPD untuk membahas RUU dan dikuranginya kewenangan DPD dalam kedudukannya sebagai lembaga perwakilan daerah. Hal ini menunjukan bahwa pembentukan UU MD3 nyata-nyata tidak menghormati putusan MK yang diberi mandat UUD NRI 1945 sebagai lembaga penafsir dan penjaga konstitusi, dengan tidak menghormati, mematuhi, dan melaksanakan putusan MK ini menunjukkan ketidakpatuhan terhadap putusan lembaga negara yang telah ditunjuk konstitusi untuk mengawal kemurnian pelaksanaan konstitusi. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode normatif menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan ( statute approach ), pendekatan konsep ( conceptual approach ), dan pendekatan historis ( historical approach ). Ketidaktaatan penyusunan UU MD3 pada putusan MK merupakan pengingkaran UUD NRI 1945 dan perkembangan ini merupakan langkah mundur reformasi. Pembentuk Undang-Undang, dalam hal ini, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR) dan Presiden harus segera melakukan perubahan UU Nomor 12 Tahun 2011 tentang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-undangan dengan berpijak pada rambu-rambu konstitusional Putusan MK Nomor 92/PUU-X/2012.</p><p>Law Number 17 Year 2014 on the People’s Consultative Assembly, House of Representatives, Regional Representatives Council, and the Regional House of Representatives (MD3 Law) after the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) is considered to have a substantive problem due to the substance that is contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (the 1945 Constitution), which resulted in the constitutional loss of Regional Representatives Council (DPD), including the reduction of DPD authority to propose draft bills, to discuss draft bills and the reduction in its authority as the regional representative institution. This shows that the drafting of MD3 Law is obviously not respecting the decision of the Court that is mandated by the 1945 Constitution as the interpreter and guardian institution of the constitutional, by not respecting, obeying and implementing MK’s decision which indicates non-compliance with the decision of the state institution that has been designated to guard the purity of the constitution implementation of the constitution. This study uses normative method with statute approach, conceptual approach and a historical approach. The noncompliance of the drafting of MD3 Law towards the MK’s decision is a denial of MK and this development is a step back of Reformation. The legislators, in this case, the House of Representatives (DPR) and the President should immediately amend the Law Number 12 Year 2011 on the Establishment of Laws and Regulations based on the MK’s Decision No. 92/PUU-X/2012. </p>

scholarly journals KEDUDUKAN KOMISI PEMBERANTASAN KORUPSI DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN INDONESIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 163
Author(s):  
Mahesa Rannie
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
State Institution ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Independent State ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Law ◽  
Constitutional System ◽  
The Right

Abstrak Kedudukan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) dalam sistem ketatanegaraan Indonesia memang seringkali diperdebatkan, hal ini terbukti dengan Putusan-Putusan MK yang berubah-ubah. Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam putusannya pernah beberapa kali memutuskan berbeda tentang kedudukan KPK ini dalam sistem ketatanegaraan Indonesia. Mahkamah Konstitusi pernah memutuskan KPK merupakan lembaga negara independen di luar ranah kekuasaan eksekutif, legislatif, dan yudikatif. Pernah pula memutuskan bahwa KPK merupakan eksekutif dilihat dari kewenangannya. Putusan-putusan MK ini tentu saja membawa pengaruh terhadap undang-undang KPK. Revisi undang-undang KPK terbaru, yaitu Undang-Undang Nomor 19 Tahun 2019 menyatakan KPK masuk dalam ranah kekuasaan eksekutif sehingga dengan demikian KPK dapat menjadi objek hak angket Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR). Hal demikian tentu saja menambah panjang perdebatan di kalangan ahli hukum dengan argumentasinya masing-masing. Dari argumentasi-argumentasi tersebut penulis menganggap KPK adalah lembaga negara independen di luar struktur organ negara yang utama. Hal ini sejalan dengan theory the new separation of power sebagai konsekuensi dari teori negara kesejahteraan (welfare state) di era abad modern ini. Sebagai lembaga negara independen yang kedudukannya tidak sekuat lembaga negara utama dalam ranah kekuasaan eksekutif, legislatif, dan yudikatif tentu saja KPK bisa dibubarkan jika lembaga yang selama ini sebetulnya mempunyai wewenang kuat untuk melaksanakan penegakan hukum dalam rangka pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi (Kepolisian dan Kejaksaan) mampu berbenah diri. Selama belum mampu berbenah maka wewenang tersebut bisa dilaksanakan oleh KPK yang keberadaannya sampai saat ini masih tetap diperlukan dalam rangka pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi di Indonesia. Kata kunci: Kedudukan KPK, Sistem Ketatanegaraan, Indonesia Abstract The position of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in the constitutional system of Indonesia is often debated. This is evidenced by the inconsistent decisions of the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court has ever made different decisions several times regarding the position of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in the constitutional system of Indonesia. The Constitutional Court once decided that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) was an independent state institution outside the realm of executive, legislative and judicial powers. It has also decided that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is an executive body in terms of its authority. These inconsistent decisions of the Constitutional Court, of course, have an influence on the law of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). The latest revision of the law of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), namely the Law Number 19 of 2019 states that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is classified to be in the realm of executive power so that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) can become the object of the right to inquiry by the House of Representatives (DPR). This situation, of course, adds to the length of debate among legal experts with their respective arguments. Based on these arguments, the writer considers that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is an independent state institution outside the main state organ structure. This is in line with the theory of the new separation of power as a consequence of the theory of the welfare state in this modern era. As an independent state institution whose position is not as strong as the main state institutions in the realm of executive, legislative and judicial powers, of course, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) can be dissolved if the institutions that actually have strong authority to carry out law enforcement in the context of eradicating criminal acts of corruption (Police and Prosecutors) are able to empower themselves to execute their authority. However, if those institutions have not been able to execute their authority, this authority can be exercised by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), whose existence is still needed in the context of eradicating criminal acts of corruption in Indonesia.

Amendment of the Contravention Code or Defiance of the Constitution by the Exceptional Situations Commission?

2021 ◽  
pp. 56-65
Author(s):  
Iulian Rusanovschi ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
Republic Of Moldova ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Epidemiological Situation

On 17.03.2020, the Parliament declared a state of emergency on the entire territory of the Republic of Moldova for the period March 17 - May 15, 2020. By the same Decision, the Parliament delegated the Commission for Exceptional Situations with the right to implement a series of measures to overcome the epidemiological situation in the country. However, in the conditions of a functioning Parliament and despite the clear and exhaustive texts of the Constitution, the Commission for Exceptional Situations amended during the state of emergency the Contravention Code, which is an organic law. The amendments specifically concerned the procedure and terms for examining infringement cases brought in connection with non-compliance with the measures adopted by the Commission for Exceptional Situations and the Extraordinary Commission for Public Health. In the conditions in which an organic law can be modified only by the Parliament, it is obvious the unconstitutionality, at least partial, of the Disposition no. 4 of 24.03.2020 of the Commission for Exceptional Situations, but unfortunately, the Constitutional Court is not mandated with the right to submit to constitutional review the normative acts adopted by the Commission for Exceptional Situations. Under these conditions, the state is obliged to identify solutions in order not to allow an authority to adopt unconstitutional normative acts that cannot be subject to constitutional review.

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.

scholarly journals The Rights Of The Constitutional Court's Decision On The House Of Representatives 'Representatives About The President's Prospective And / Or The President's Vice Representatives According To The State Basic Law Of The Republic Of Indonesia Year 1945

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fahri Bachmid ◽  
Said Sampara ◽  
La Ode Husen
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Vice President ◽  
The State ◽  
Political Institution ◽  
Vocational School ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Legislative Assembly

This study examined the rights of the constutional court’s decision on the house of representative’s representatives about on the president prospective and/ or the president’s vice private vocational school by the state basic state of the Republic of Indonesia year 1945. The purpose of this study is to find out the mechanism of the Constitutional Court in examining, adjudicating and deciding the opinion of the People's Legislative Assembly that the President and / or Vice President have violated the law in the form of treason against the state, corruption, bribery, other serious criminal acts, disgraceful acts, and / or the opinion that the president and / or the vice president no longer meets the requirements as President and / or Vice President. And also To find out the decision of the Constitutional Court as a binding judicial institution on the opinion of the House of Representatives followed up by the MPR as a political institution that the President and / or Vice President has violated the law in the form of treason, corruption, bribery, other serious crimes, disgraceful acts and / or the opinion that the president and / or vice president no longer fulfill the requirements as President and / or Vice President.

scholarly journals 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)

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.

Republika Chorwacji: wyrok Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z 3 lipca 2020 r. dotyczący prawa do głosowania osób znajdujących się w izolacji w związku z zakażeniem lub podejrzeniem zakażenia koronawirusem SARS-CoV-2, sygn. U-VII-2980/2020

2020 ◽  
Vol 6(161) ◽  
pp. 217-222
Author(s):  
Marcin Rulka
Keyword(s):  
Infectious Disease ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Parliamentary Elections ◽  
Governmental Organizations ◽  
Non Governmental Organizations ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Election Commission ◽  
Coronavirus Infections

The parliamentary elections in Croatia were ordered for 5 July 2020. However, as the election date approached, the number of coronavirus infections increased, prompting the authority responsible for overseeing the conduct of the elections, i.e., the State Election Commission of the Republic of Croatia, to issue appropriate voting guidelines. People in self-isolation had the opportunity to vote only if the registration activities were completed by 2 July 2020, as this guaranteed a visit from a member of the election commission to whom they could pass the vote, but completely excluded infected persons from the vote. On 1 July 2020, one of the Croatian non-governmental organizations, the GONG, submitted a request to the Constitutional Court (supported by the signatures of several dozen citizens) to examine the legality of the elections, arguing that the state authorities are obliged to give each voter the possibility to vote in the elections. The Constitutional Court stated that the state authorities are obliged to create the legal possibility of exercising the right to vote guaranteed by the constitution for all citizens who express such wish, including those who have been diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID 19) or any other infectious disease, and who, for this reason, remain in isolation.

scholarly journals PENGUATAN PENGATURAN HAK ANAK BERDASARKAN KONSTITUSI DAN PERBANDINGAN KONSTITUSI DIBERBAGAI NEGARA

AN-NISA ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 372-383
Author(s):  
Ismail Aris
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Child Protection ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Constitutional Protection ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

This article shows that the constitution or the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia can not be regarded as children's constitution which adopts the principles of child protection under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. It also shows that Indonesia is not serious about the theme of child protection discourse such as Ecuador, Egypt, Finland and South Africa in protecting, fulfilling and respecting and explicitly specifying the rights of children in its constitution. Based on the argument above, it is very urgent for Indonesia to do constitutionalism the rights of the child. Based on the principles that adopted by the convention on the right of the child as a solution as an effort to save and protect the rights of the child from negligence and neglect of the State to protect and fulfill the human rights and constitutional rights of the child. The effort of constitutionalism is also considered as a strengthening effort in the formation of legislation in the future as well as the basis or test stone of the Constitutional Court in handling the future judicial review of the Law which violates the norm on the protection of children's rights under the Constitution. In addition, it is urgent for constitutionalism and incorporates the idea of constitutional complaints in the Constitutional Court through the Constitution. Thus, as a basis for constitutional protection of the child if the State has neglect to protect the human rights and constitutional rights of the child by conducting constitutional complaint in the Constitutional Court, in order for the State to fulfill its constitutional obligations which have been regulated under the constitution.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document