scholarly journals Diskursus Pembatalan Peraturan Daerah Pasca Putusan MK No. 137/PUU-XIII/2015 dan No. 56/PUU-XIV/2016

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 710
Author(s):  
Yuswanto Yuswanto ◽  
M. Yasin Al Arif
Keyword(s):  
Local Government ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Local Regulation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Post Test

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis diskursus pembatalan Perda pasca dikeluarkannya putusan MK No. 137/PUU-XIII/2015 dan No. 56/PUU-XIV/2016 atas pengujian UU No. 23 Tahun 2014 terhadap UUD 1945 yang dibatasi dalam dua rumusan masalah. Pertama, bagaimana implementasi pengujian Perda pasca Putusan MK No. 137/PUU-XIII/2015 dan No. 56/PUU-XIV/2016?. Kedua, apakah dampak putusan MK No. 137/PUU-XIII/2015 dan No. 56/PUU-XIV/2016 terhadap perkembangan hukum pemerintah daerah? Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach) dan pendekatan kasus (case approach). Data yang digunakan adalah data sekunder yang berupa bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder dan bahan hukum tersier. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa: pertama, pasca putusan MK pengujian Perda hanya dilakukan oleh sebuah lembaga yudisial melalui judicial review di Mahkamah Agung. Kedua, terdapat dua dampak penting atas dikeluarkannya putusan MK, pertama, dengan dibatalkannya Pasal 251 UU No. 23 Tahun 2014 maka hal ini mengakhiri dualisme pengujian Perda, karena Menteri tidak dapat lagi melakukan executive review. Kedua, putusan MK o. 137/PUU-XIII/2015 dan No. 56/PUU-XIV/2016 tidak menghapuskan pengawasan Pusat terhadap Perda karena masih dapat dilakukan pengawasan preventif melalui executive preview.This study aimed to analyze the discourse of cancellation after the issuance of local regulations following the Constitutional Court decision No. 137/PUU-XIII/2015 and No. 56/PUU-XIV/2016 on judicial review of Law No. 23 2014 towards the 1945 Constitution which are restricted in two formulation of the problem. First, how is the implementation of a post-test Constitutional Court Regulation No. 137/PUU-XIII/2015 and No. 56/PUU-XIV/2016? Second, what are the effects of the Constitutional Court decision No. 137/PUU-XIII/2015 and No. 56/PUU-XIV/2016 on the development of the local government law? This study is a normative with statute approach and case approach. The data used was secondary data in the form of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The results showed that: firstly, the following decision of the Constitutional Court about regional regulations review can only be conducted by a judicial body through a judicial review in the Supreme Court. Secondly, there are two important effects on the issuance of the decision of the Constitutional Court, first, by the cancellation of Article 251 of Law No. 23 year 2014 then the duality of local regulation testing is ended, because the Minister can no longer perform executive review. Second, the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 137/PUU-XIII/2015 and No. 56/PUU-XIV/2016 does not abolish the supervision of the Center Government because they do preventive supervision through executive preview.

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

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.

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

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. 

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

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.

scholarly journals JUDGE’S DECISION ON WORK TERMINATION DISPUTE IN INDONESIA AFTER CONSTITUTIONAL COURT DECISION NUMBER 37/PUU-IX/2011

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neni Vesna Madjid ◽  
Saldi Isra ◽  
Kurnia Warman ◽  
Mardenis Mardenis
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Industrial Relation ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Legal Documents ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Force

Testing the provision of Article 155 section (2) Law Number 13 of 2003 on Manpower has been decided by the Constitutional Court (CC) through decision Number 37/PUU/IX/2011. Prior to the Constitutional Court decision, there are many various interpretations of undetermined clause. The Constitutional Court firmly states that the undetermined clause must be interpreted as “having a permanent legal force ".This study aims to analyze how the judges dismissed dispute of work termination cases in Indonesia after the decision. The research applied juridical normative method  by using secondary data literature such as legal documents, previous studies and other references which are relevant to the judges' decision within the Supreme Court after the Constitutional Court decision. Based on the analysis temporary result, the judges within the Supreme Court in 3 regions (Padang, Pekanbaru and Jakarta Pusat) and the Supreme Court itself are not practically guided by the Constitutional Court decision. It obviously results in the lack of legal certainty for the parties, especially workers.Keyword: Constitutional Court, Industrial Relation Court, Interpretation, Supreme Court.

scholarly journals The Original Intent of Settings Judicial Review of Local Regulations in Indonesia

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 300
Author(s):  
Desyanti Desyanti ◽  
Sudarsono Sudarsono ◽  
Muchamad Ali Safa’at ◽  
Tunggul Anshari Setia Negara
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
Original Intent ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Library Studies ◽  
The Right

There are differences in the characteristics of judicial review in the Supreme Court and in the Constitutional Court in terms of the object being tested and the use of test stones that are indeed by the authority granted by the 1945 Constitution. The principle of audi et alteram partem is a general principle in the study of law, so the judicial review process in the Supreme Court which is only one-way and closed should not be carried out. This article analyzes and explores the original intent of granting judicial review authority to regional regulations at the Supreme Court. This article is normative legal research conducted by examining legal materials (library studies) or secondary data. The original intent the granting of judicial review authority to the Supreme Court is intended to foster checks and balances between various high state institutions. In addition, the granting of the right of judicial review is intended to enforce checks and balances between the three branches of power.

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

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.

scholarly journals MODEL PENGUJIAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN SATU ATAP MELALUI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 247
Author(s):  
Sholahuddin Al-Fatih
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Regulatory Testing ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Bureaucratic Reform

Post-reform of the role of judicial institution is run by two institutions namely the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. The duties and authorities of the two institutions are regulated in the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia 1945 and the act that addresses the three institutions more specifically. Several powers possessed by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, one of them is the authority to judicial review. The Constitutional Court is authorized to review the act on the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia 1945, while the Supreme Court is authorized to review under the Act on the above legislation.The unfairness of the regulatory testing function is feared to trigger bureaucratic inefficiency. Based on data released by the Supreme Court Clerk, it was recorded during 2016 that the Supreme Court received 18,514 cases, including the Hak Uji Materi (HUM) subject to legislation under the Act. While the number of cases of judicial review of the Constitutional Court in 2016-2017 amounted to only 332 cases. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a bureaucratic reform and provide new ideas related to the model of one court of judicial review in Indonesia. So that in this paper will be discussed deeply about problematic of judicial review in Indonesia and the authority of the Constitutional Court to review the act under one roof with SIJURI mechanism.

scholarly journals KAJIAN YURIDIS TERHADAP PENEGASAN HIEARAKI PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN DI INDONESIA DALAM PERSPEKTIF STUFEN THEORIE

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 95
Author(s):  
Muhammad Yusrizal Adi Syaputra
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Uncertainty

Rule lower against the rules of higher then lower regulation it can test the material (judicial review) to be canceled entirely or partially canceled. The assertion of hierarchy intended to prevent overlap between legislation that could give rise to legal uncertainty. Position regulations set by the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) House of Representatives (DPR), the Regional Representatives Council (DPD), the Supreme Court (MA), the Constitutional Court (MK), the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK), Commission Judicial (KY) , Bank Indonesia (BI), the Minister, the Agency, Organization, or commissions, in the Indonesian legal system recognized by Act No. 12 of 2011 either were born because of higher regulatory mandate and within the scope and authority of the minister. Thus, no doubt that the regulations set by state institutions, have binding force that must be obeyed by the parties set forth therein. While the Regulations issued policy also recognized as an Freies Ermessen in the execution of its duties and functions.<br /><br />

scholarly journals ANALISIS YURIDIS PENGATURAN IDEAL PENINJAUAN KEMBALI PERKARA PIDANA PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 34/PUU-XI/2013

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Agung Barok Pratama ◽  
Aminah . ◽  
Mohammad Jamin
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Law Enforcement Officials ◽  
The Ideal

<p>Abstract<br />This article  discusses the ideal setting reconsideration after the Constitutional Court decision No. 34/PUU-XII/2013. This research is legal (judicial) normative, namely by reviewing library materials (literature study). Therefore, the data used in this research is secondary data, which includes the primary legal materials, secondary, and tertiary. The results of this study showed that realizing an ideal regulatory application for review should be conducted, first, the MA should retract SEMA 7 2014 it is necessary to avoid confusion law enforcement officials and people seeking justice so as to interfere with the judicial system. If want to make additional rules to facilitate the course of justice, the MA should be poured in the form of PERMA. Second, by accelerating the process of PK and execution. Thirdly, provision PK in the future submission must be adapted to the Constitutional Court decision No. 34/PUU-X/2013. That way the material truth and justice will actually be realized.</p><p>Keywords: Judicial Review; Justice; Rule of Law; Supreme Court Decisions.</p><p>Abstrak<br />Artikel ini meneliti tentang pengaturan ideal peninjauan kembali pasca putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 34/PUU-XII/2013.Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum (yuridis) normatif, yaitu dengan mengkaji bahan-bahan pustaka (studi kepustakaan). Karena itu, data yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah data skunder, yang mencakup bahan hukum primer, skunder, dan tersier. Hasil Penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa, demi menwujudkan suatu peraturan yang ideal permohonan peninjauan kembali maka perlu dilakukan, pertama, MA harus menarik kembali SEMA No.7 Tahun 2014 hal ini ini diperlukan agar tidak terjadi kebingungan aparat penegak hukum dan masyarakat pencari keadilan sehingga dapat mengganggu sistem peradilan. Kedua, dengan mempercepat proses PK dan eksekusinya. Ketiga, ketentuan pengajuan PK kedepanya harus disesuaikan dengan putusan MK No. 34/PUU-XI/2013. Dengan begitu keadilan dan kebenaran materiil akan benar-benar dapat diwujudkan.<br />Kata kunci: Peninjauan Kembali, Keadilan, Kepastian Hukum, Putusan Mahkamah Agung</p>

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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document