Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
2.012
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Unes Law Review JURNAL PEMBANGUNAN HUKUM INDONESIA Jurnal Suara Hukum TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum PATTIMURA Law Study Review CAPITAN: Constitutional Law & Administrative Law Review Jurnal Saniri
Soplanit, Miracle
Unknown Affiliation
Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Physics Public Health Social Sciences

Published : 12 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 12 Documents
Search

 1   2 
Inkonsistensi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Memutus Perpanjangan Masa Jabatan Ketua Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi Siletty, Yondri; Irham, Muhammad; Soplanit, Miracle
CAPITAN: Constitutional Law & Administrative Law Review Vol 3 No 2 (2025): Desember 2025 CAPITAN: Constitutional Law & Administrative Law Review
Publisher : Pusat Studi Hukum dan Pemerintahan Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pattimura

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47268/capitan.v3i2.14719

Abstract

The Constitutional Court or hereinafter abbreviated as MK is one of the judicial institutions that has a very important role in guarding and maintaining the constitution. To carry out this role, MK has the authority to conduct judicial review in the form of testing a law to ensure that the law formed by the legislator does not conflict with higher norms, namely the Constitution. However, in exercising this authority, MK in several of its decisions often causes polemics in the community due to the inconsistency of decisions experienced by the court in deciding similar cases. As in the case of testing the institutional term of office, which has been tested several times to MK but has different verdicts, where the majority of the MK decisions consistently reject and do not grant the applicant's request in this type of case, but on the other hand there are MK decisions that grant the applicant's request to extend the existing term of office, such as MK Decision Number 112/PUU-XX/2022 which extends the term of office of the leadership of the KPK from 4 to 5 years. This writing uses a Normative Juridical research type, with a statutory approach, conceptual approach. This research shows that the MK has experienced inconsistency in its stance when compared to several similar MK decisions that have examined the issue of the term of office of other independent institutions and that the Decision a quo has given rise to the meaning of existing legal consequences.
Kajian Yuridis Pemberhentian Periode Masa Jabatan Kepala Daerah Ulahayanan, Antonius; Piris, Hendry John; Soplanit, Miracle
Jurnal Saniri Vol 6, No 1 (2025): Volume 6 Nomor 1, November 2025
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Pattimura

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47268/saniri.v6i1.3517

Abstract

Article 162 paragraphs (1) and (2) of Law Number 10 of 2016 concerning Regional Head Elections (Pilkada) stipulate that regional heads hold office for five years from the date of inauguration and may be re-elected only once for the same position. However, this provision gives rise to differing interpretations when Article 201 paragraphs (5) and (7) regulate the terms of office for regional heads elected in 2018 and 2020, which end in 2023 and 2024, respectively. This inconsistency has led to constitutional disputes, as seen in the lawsuit filed by several regional heads elected in 2018 but inaugurated in 2019 against Article 201 paragraph (5) of the Pilkada Law, which was partially granted by the Constitutional Court (Decision No. 143/PUU-XXI/2023), while a similar lawsuit against Article 201 paragraph (7) was entirely rejected in 2022. This study aims to analyze the legal validity of terminating the term of office of regional heads and its legal implications in the implementation of the 2024 simultaneous regional elections. The research employs a normative legal method with statutory and conceptual approaches. The results indicate that the termination of the regional heads’ term of office for the alignment of the 2024 simultaneous elections has binding legal force in accordance with existing legislation. The resulting legal implications include potential normative inconsistencies, challenges to legal compliance, impacts on the continuity of governmental programs, administrative adjustments, and effects on public trust.
Co-Authors Alfons, Sartje Sarah Bakarbessy, Andress D Berlianty, Teng D. Bakarbessy, Andress Koranelao, Abdul Latif Lain, Haryani Mail, Syed Muhammad Huzaif Muhammad Irham Nendissa, Renny Heronia Pattinasarany, Yohanes Pattipawae, Dezonda Rosiana Pietersz, Jemmy Jefry Piris, Hendry John Puru, Silvia Yuniwati Raihan, Muhammad S. Alfons, Saartje Saartje Sarah Alfons Siletty, Yondri Souhoka, Vhanesya Claudya Talaksoru, Derek Ulahayanan, Antonius