Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"

Sejak tahun 2009 hingga tahun 2018, terdapat 21 Permohonan Pengujian Perppu yang pernah  diajukan ke Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK), namun, tidak ada satupun  yang diuji secara substantif.  Dengan kata lain, selama ini  tidak pernah ada permohonan yang dikabulkan atau ditolak oleh MK. Hal ini boleh jadi disebabkan oleh adanya kewenangan konstitusional yang dimiliki DPR sebagaimana ketentuan Pasal 22 UUD 1945 untuk menyetujui atau tidaknya suatu Perppu menjadi undang-undang. Penelitian ini  adalah penelitian hukum normatif dengan menggunakan tipologi penelitian preskriptif dan menggunakan data sekunder  serta  merujuk peraturan perundang-undangan,  yang mana dari penelitian ini, telah diketahui bahwa pengaturan mengenai pengujian terhadap Perppu baru muncul setelah adanya amandemen terhadap UUD 1945, tepatnya setelah adanya Ketetapan MPR Nomor III/MPR/2000. Menurut Ketetapan MPR tersebut, pengujian Perppu dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Agung (MA). Namun  sejak tahun 2000 hingga tahun 2009, setelah MK terbentuk, baik MK maupun MA belum pernah melakukan pengujian terhadap Perppu. Baru sejak  tahun 2009, MK mulai melakukan pengujian terhadap Perppu dan menghasilkan  Putusan MK Nomor 138/PUU-VII/2009 putusan mana selanjutnya menjadi “pintu masuk” untuk melakukan pengujian-pengujian  Perppu berikutnya meskipun sesungguhnya hanya akan sia-sia jika DPR ternyata menentukan sebaliknya. Jika bangsa ini sungguh-sungguh menghendaki MK memiliki kewenangan untuk menguji Perppu, maka kewenangan konstitusional yang dimiliki DPR tersebut  mau tidak mau harus dihapuskan. Selanjutnya, untuk meneguhkan adanya kewenangan MK tersebut, tentunya harus diberikan berdasarkan UUD.

 

Kata Kunci:

Judicial Review Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang; Mahkamah Konstitusi; Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 138/PUU-VII/2009.

---

Since 2009 until 2018, there are 21 applications for testing the Perppu that have been submitted to the Constitutional Court (MK), however, none of them have been substantively tested. In other words, so far there has never been a request that was granted or rejected by the Constitutional Court. This may be due to the existence of constitutional authority owned by the DPR as stipulated in Article 22 of the 1945 Constitution to approve or not a Perppu to become a law. This research is a normative legal research using prescriptive research typology and using secondary data and referring to laws and regulations, which from this research, it is known that the regulation regarding the reviewing of Perppu only appeared after the amendments to the UUD 1945, precisely after the MPR Decree Number III / MPR / 2000. According to the MPR Decree, the Perppu review was conducted by the Supreme Court (MA). However, from 2000 to 2009, after the Constitutional Court was formed, both the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court have never reviewed Perppu. It was only since 2009 that the Constitutional Court began to reviewing  Perppu and resulted in the verdict of The Constitutional Court Number 138 / PUU-VII / 2009 which subsequently became the "entrance" to conduct subsequent Perppu reveiew even though it would only be in vain if the DPR turned out to determine otherwise. If this nation truly wants the Constitutional Court to have the authority to review Perppu, then the constitutional authority possessed by the DPR must inevitably be eliminated. Furthermore, to confirm the existence of the Constitutional Court's authority, of course it must be given based on the Constitution.

"

"The founding of a constitutional court is often an indication of a chosen path of constitutionalism and democracy. It is no coincidence that most of the constitutional courts in East and Southeast Asia were established at the same time as the transition of the countries concerned from authoritarianism to liberal constitutional democracy. This book is the first to provide systematic narratives and analysis of Asian experiences of constitutional courts and related developments, and to introduce comparative, historical and theoretical perspectives on these experiences, as well as debates on the relevant issues in countries that do not as yet have constitutional courts. This volume makes a significant contribution to the systematic and comparative study of constitutional courts, constitutional adjudication and constitutional developments in East and Southeast Asia and beyond."

"The power of national and transnational constitutional courts to issue binding rulings in interpreting the constitution or an international treaty has been endlessly discussed. What does it mean for democratic governance that non-elected judges influence politics and policies? The authors of Judicial Power - legal scholars, political scientists, and judges - take a fresh look at this problem. To date, research has concentrated on the legitimacy, or the effectiveness, or specific decision-making methods of constitutional courts. By contrast, the authors here explore the relationship among these three factors. This book presents the hypothesis that judicial review allows for a method of reflecting on social integration that differs from political methods, and, precisely because of the difference between judicial and political decision-making, strengthens democratic governance. This hypothesis is tested in case studies on the role of constitutional courts in political transformations, on the methods of these courts, and on transnational judicial interactions."

"Constitutional Court has authority to judge at the first and final level that decision is final functioning, among other, to review Law against Constitution Final decision of the court, as intended in Article 24C of 1945 Constitution of Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, does not open opportunity for appeal, cassation or other legal efforts."

"ABSTRAKOne of the duties of the Indonesian Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi - MK) is to determine whether legislation is consistent with the Constitution. If the MK determines that a statute is inconsistent with the Constitution, it declares that such statute is invalid. In such instance, the MK has the final word to determine the validity of legislation. In the view of some scholars, this feature reflects that the MK adopts strong form of judicial review. While this assertion holds true in some cases, it does not necessarily reflect the complete feature of the MKs approach in deciding cases. In some economic and social rights cases, the MK decision adopts weak form of judicial review. This paper attempts to explain that while constitutionally the MK adopts strong form of judicial review, in some economic and social rights cases it adopts weak form of judicial review."

"Pengujian undang-undang merupakan kewenangan yang paling dominan terjadi di Mahkamah Konstitusi. Akan tetapi hingga empat belas tahun Mahkamah Konstitusi dibentuk belum ada ketentuan yang secara khusus mengatur mengenai batas waktu penyelesaiannya. Tesis ini membahas sekaligus merumuskan urgensi batas waktu penyelesaian pengujian undang-undang di Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian normatif yang disempurnakan dengan perbandingan lima negara. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa telah terjadi standar ganda antara batas waktu pengujian undang-undang dengan sengketa yang lain dimana sengketa pembubaran partai politik, perselisihan hasil pemilihan umum dan impeachment memiliki batas waktu penyelesaian sedangkan pengujian undang-undang yang notabenenya adalah kewenangan dominan dari Mahkamah Konstitusi justru tidak memiliki batas waktu penyelesaiannya.Selain itu ketiadaan batas waktu penyelesaian juga terbukti menciptakan suatu kondisi yang dinamakan justice delayed is justice denied, dimana baik Pemohon, Masyarakat dan Mahkamah Agung tidak mengetahui kepastian waktu tentang putusan pengujian undang-undang akan memiliki kekuatan hukum tetap. Kasus korupsi mantan Hakim Konstitusi berinisial "PA" juga menjadi studi dalam penelitian ini yang membuktikan bahwa ketiadaan batas waktu menciptakan ruang negosiasi antara para pihak dan oknum pengadilan untuk melakukan tindakan koruptif. Maka dari itu perlu adanya upaya untuk merevisi Undang-Undang Mahkamah Konstitusi dengan menambahkan tiga formulasi batas waktu penyelesaian pengujian undang-undang dalam suatu rumusan norma. Ketiga rumusan tersebut adalah batas waktu pengujian undang-undang yang bersifat kerugian potensial terhadap peristiwa konkret, batas waktu penyelesaian terhadap PERPU, dan batas waktu secara umum. Apabila Mahkamah Konstitusi memutus lebih dari waktu yang telah ditentukan maka terdapat konsekuensi hukum yang harus dilakukan berupa melakukan notifikasi dan penjelasan yang rasional kepada Pemohon dan Masyarakat.

---

Judicial Review represents the most dominant authority at the Constitutional Court. However, it has been fourteen years since the establishment of the Constitutional Court and the regulation to specifically determine a definite deadline for case resolution has yet to be issued. This theses discusses and also formulate the urgency to establish case resolution deadline for judicial review at the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The research method applied utilizes normative research method improvised with comparative study from three countries. Research results revealed signs of double standards between the deadlines for judicial review with other judicial disputes, whereas political party dissolution dispute, general election results dispute and impeachment presented definite deadline for case resolution while judicial review which supposedly represents the domain jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court fails to submit any deadline for case resolution. In alternative, that the vacuum in such deadline has generated the condition known as "justice delayed is justice denied", in which the Applicant, Public and the Supreme Court is shrouded concerning the definite deadline for the judicial review, to interpret any legal binding effect out of it. The corruption case of "PA" as former Constitutional Court was also investigated in this research as an evidence that the vacuum in the deadline has in turn created a negotiation room between parties and court officials to conduct corruptive actions. As such, the necessity to revised the Law on Constitutional Court is of paramount importance by adding three formula on deadline for case resolution within a normative framework. Those three formulations constitutes deadline in judicial review for laws with potential laws in nature to concrete events, deadline in judicial review to PERPU, and general deadline. In the event that the Constitutional Court issued a decision for such case beyond the agreed deadline, then such act will trigger mandatory legal consequences comprised of issuing notification and rational reasoning to the Applicant and Public at large. "

"The present volume studies international judicial lawmaking. It observes that in a number of fields of international law, judicial institutions have become significant actors and shape the law through adjudication. "