Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Veritas et Justitia Mulawarman Law Review
Azhar, Ikhsan
Unknown Affiliation
Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 4 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 4 Documents
Search

 1 
INKONSISTENSI PENERAPAN PRINSIP INDEPENDENSI KEKUASAAN KEHAKIMAN DALAM PELAKSANAAN SELEKSI CALON HAKIM Azhar, Ikhsan
Veritas et Justitia Vol. 4 No. 2 (2018): Veritas et Justitia
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25123/vej.v4i2.3070

Abstract

The general public in 2017 hotly debated the implemented selection process of Judges. The focus is on the issue of government involvement in the selection process which potentially jeopardize the judiciary’s independence.  In discussing this particular issue, the author uses a juridical normative or dogmatic approach and other data is collected by the use of library research . In addition, the author also compares the existing policy and rules/regulation concerning judge selection from different government’ era (the Old & New Order). A number of conclusions can be drawn from this comparison, i.e. that during the Old dan New Order Government, the judiciary was never considered independent. The government on a regular basis intervene in the selection process, appointment and placement of judges and have a strong say in their professional carrer path.  In contrast, only after the fall of the New Order Government, did the Judiciary enjoy independence which is guaranteed by virtue of Law 35/1999 and the 1945 Constitution (amended version).  Unfortunately though the Supreme Court decide to bring back in the government in the selection process and in doing that jeopardize the judicary’s independence.
Manajemen Hakim (Studi Perbandingan Indonesia dengan Turki) Azhar, Ikhsan
Jurnal Mulawarman Law Review Vol 3 No 1: Mulawarman Law Review - June 2018
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Mulawarman University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30872/mulrev.v3i1.33

Abstract

In the past three years, the profession as a judge has been in the spotlight. The reason is because this profession can be referred to as "God’s Deputy" and as a place for the last hope of the public in seeking justice it turns out that it was also been exposed by the Corruption Eradication Commission’s sting operation (KPK OTT) and so many were proven and punished for violating ethics. This is the reason why the urgency of the management of judges will be echoed. To make improvements, the research should not stand alone, but also see the practice of independence from the judicial power institutions and similar institutions of Judicial Commission (KY). In this regard, it is important to study with practice abroad, which in this paper takes Turkey as the comparative country of Indonesia. It is hoped to get a picture of practices from other countries, there are lessons that can be adopted in Indonesia to be regulated and practiced. In order for writing to be more focused the author uses normative legal research methods with a comparative approach. After studying the material and data, there are several results of this study, including the first judicial power institutions in Turkey and Indonesia which are independent institutions, and are equally regulated in the constitution, especially the judicial power chapter; second, the history of reform in implementing the management functions of judges in Turkey and Indonesia is different. If in Turkey it is done by separating it from the executive institution by establishing an HCJP institution, while in Indonesia it is carried out by being united to the judicial power institution; third, in Turkey the management of judges such as recruitment, regulating the placement, promotion, transfer, supervision, and imposition of disciplinary measures is carried out by other institutions called HCJP, while in Indonesia the management of judges is carried out by the Supreme Court. Even though KY has a duty in relation to the management of the judge's position, only in terms of training and supervision; fourth, HCJP and KY are equally regulated in the constitution, especially the judicial power chapter, and also have their own technical rules made to facilitate the implementation of their authority and duties.
Manajemen Hakim (Studi Perbandingan Indonesia dengan Turki) Azhar, Ikhsan
Jurnal Mulawarman Law Review Vol 3 No 1: Mulawarman Law Review - June 2018
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Mulawarman University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (1240.659 KB) | DOI: 10.30872/mulrev.v3i1.33

Abstract

In the past three years, the profession as a judge has been in the spotlight. The reason is because this profession can be referred to as "God’s Deputy" and as a place for the last hope of the public in seeking justice it turns out that it was also been exposed by the Corruption Eradication Commission’s sting operation (KPK OTT) and so many were proven and punished for violating ethics. This is the reason why the urgency of the management of judges will be echoed. To make improvements, the research should not stand alone, but also see the practice of independence from the judicial power institutions and similar institutions of Judicial Commission (KY). In this regard, it is important to study with practice abroad, which in this paper takes Turkey as the comparative country of Indonesia. It is hoped to get a picture of practices from other countries, there are lessons that can be adopted in Indonesia to be regulated and practiced. In order for writing to be more focused the author uses normative legal research methods with a comparative approach. After studying the material and data, there are several results of this study, including the first judicial power institutions in Turkey and Indonesia which are independent institutions, and are equally regulated in the constitution, especially the judicial power chapter; second, the history of reform in implementing the management functions of judges in Turkey and Indonesia is different. If in Turkey it is done by separating it from the executive institution by establishing an HCJP institution, while in Indonesia it is carried out by being united to the judicial power institution; third, in Turkey the management of judges such as recruitment, regulating the placement, promotion, transfer, supervision, and imposition of disciplinary measures is carried out by other institutions called HCJP, while in Indonesia the management of judges is carried out by the Supreme Court. Even though KY has a duty in relation to the management of the judge's position, only in terms of training and supervision; fourth, HCJP and KY are equally regulated in the constitution, especially the judicial power chapter, and also have their own technical rules made to facilitate the implementation of their authority and duties.
INKONSISTENSI PENERAPAN PRINSIP INDEPENDENSI KEKUASAAN KEHAKIMAN DALAM PELAKSANAAN SELEKSI CALON HAKIM Azhar, Ikhsan
Veritas et Justitia Vol. 4 No. 2 (2018): Veritas et Justitia
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25123/vej.v4i2.3070

Abstract

The general public in 2017 hotly debated the implemented selection process of Judges. The focus is on the issue of government involvement in the selection process which potentially jeopardize the judiciary’s independence.  In discussing this particular issue, the author uses a juridical normative or dogmatic approach and other data is collected by the use of library research . In addition, the author also compares the existing policy and rules/regulation concerning judge selection from different government’ era (the Old & New Order). A number of conclusions can be drawn from this comparison, i.e. that during the Old dan New Order Government, the judiciary was never considered independent. The government on a regular basis intervene in the selection process, appointment and placement of judges and have a strong say in their professional carrer path.  In contrast, only after the fall of the New Order Government, did the Judiciary enjoy independence which is guaranteed by virtue of Law 35/1999 and the 1945 Constitution (amended version).  Unfortunately though the Supreme Court decide to bring back in the government in the selection process and in doing that jeopardize the judicary’s independence.
Co-Authors