Perubahan Politik Hukum Pengujian Peraturan Daerah Pasca Putusan MK (Bagian Buku)


PERUBAHAN POLITIK HUKUM PENGUJIAN PERATURAN DAERAH PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI

Pan Mohamad Faiz

Pusat Penelitian dan Pengkajian Perkara Mahkamah Konstitusi RI

Cover DepanPada medio 2016, Pemerintah melalui Kementerian Dalam Negeri mencabut dan merevisi sebanyak 3.143 Peraturan Daerah (Perda), Peraturan Kepala Daerah (Perkada), dan Peraturan Mendagri (Kemendagri, 2016). Umumnya, Perda dan Perkada yang dicabut atau direvisi tersebut berkaitan dengan investasi, retribusi, dan pajak. Menteri Dalam Negeri dan Gubernur sebagai wakil Pemerintah Pusat dapat membatalkan Perda dan Perkada tersebut karena telah diberikan wewenang berdasarkan Pasal 251 ayat (1) dan ayat (2) UU Nomor 23 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah (selanjutnya disebut UU Pemda). Alasan utama Pemerintah untuk melakukan deregulasi Perda dan Perkada tersebut, sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 250 UU Pemda, karena dinilai bertentangan dengan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan yang lebih tinggi dan kepentingan umum, khususnya telah menyebabkan terganggunya akses terhadap pelayanan publik dan/atau terganggunya kegiatan ekonomi untuk meningkatkan kesejahteraan masyarakat.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Legal Problems of Dualism of Judicial Review System in Indonesia


LEGAL PROBLEMS OF DUALISM OF JUDICIAL REVIEW SYSTEM IN INDONESIA

* Published in Jurnal Dinamika Hukum, Vol. 16, No. 2, May 2016, pp. 187-195

screen-shootAbstract: Indonesia implements dualism of judicial review system because there are two different judicial institutions that are granted the authority to review laws and regulations, namely the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. This research aims to analyse the problems caused by the dualism of judicial review system. It found two main legal problems of the current system. First, there is an inconsistency of decisions concerning judicial review cases for the same legal issues decided by the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. Second, there is no mechanism to review the constitutionality of People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) decisions and regulations under the level of law. Based on these findings, this research suggests that the authority to review all laws and regulations should be integrated under the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court.

Keywords: Constitutional Court, Constitutional Review, Judicial Review, Indonesian Legal System

Download: here.

Continue reading

Constitutional Complaint and Constitutional Question in the Indonesian Constitutional Court


A PROSPECT AND CHALLENGES FOR ADOPTING CONSTITUTIONAL COMPLAINT AND CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION IN THE INDONESIAN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

* Published in Constitutional Review, Vol. 2, No. 1, May 2016, pp. 103-128

constitutional-reviewAbstract: A jurisdiction of the Indonesian Constitutional Court concerning constitutional adjudication is only limited to review the constitutionality of national law. There is no mechanism for challenging any decision or action made by public authorities that violate fundamental rights enshrined in the Indonesian Constitution. This article argues that constitutional complaint and constitutional question might be adopted as new jurisdictions of the Indonesian Constitutional Court in order to strengthen the protection of fundamental rights of its citizen. It also identifies main problems that will be faced by the Constitutional Court in exercising constitutional complaint and constitutional question. For instance, the Court will be burdened with too many cases as experienced by other countries. A clear mechanism for filtering applications lodged to the Constitutional Court and the time limit for deciding cases are important elements that have to be regulated to overcome the problems. In addition, the institutional structure of the Constitutional Court has to be improved, particularly to support its decision-making process.

Keywords: Constitutional Complaint, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Question, Fundamental Rights, Individual Application

Download: here.

Continue reading

Struktur Dukungan untuk Mobilisasi Hukum di Mahkamah Konstitusi


STRUKTUR DUKUNGAN UNTUK MOBILISASI HUKUM DI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI

* Dimuat pada Kolom Khazanah, KONSTITUSI No. 93, Edisi November 2014 (Hal 70-75)

Majalah_90_Majalah Edisi November 2014 _Page_01Kajian akademis yang dilakukan oleh peneliti asing mengenai peran pengadilan di Indonesia terhadap akses keadilan seringkali menekankan pada aktivisme yudisial dan insentif bagi para hakim dalam membuat putusan terkait dengan hak warga negara. Namun, tidak banyak peneliti yang mengkaji peran mobilisasi hukum (legal mobilisation) dalam upaya mempertahankan dan memenuhi hak-hak warga negara yang tercantum dalam UUD 1945 dan Undang-Undang.

Dengan menggunakan teori support structures for legal mobilisation (SSLM), Andrew Rosser dan Jayne Curnow dalam tulisannya “Legal Mobilisation and Justice: Insight from the Constitutional Court Case on International Standard Schools in Indonesia” yang diterbitkan oleh Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology (2014), menguraikan bagaimana SSLM dapat membentuk kemampuan para pencari keadilan dalam menerjemahkan kebutuhannya terhadap keadilan dan perlindungan hak warga negara. SSLM ini kemudian melahirkan tindakan-tindakan yang dapat ditempuh untuk memberikan tambahan kekuatan dan kekuasaan bagi para pencari keadilan dalam pemenuhan kebutuhannya tersebut.

Continue reading