Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
4.68
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Wacana Hukum DE JURE Syiar Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Jurnal Dinamika Hukum Hukum Islam Jurnal Cita Hukum Unifikasi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Jurnal IUS (Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan) Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM UIR LAW REVIEW Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies Jurnal Selat Lex Librum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Awang Long Law Review Jurnal Yudisial PROGRESIF: Jurnal Hukum Pagaruyuang Law Journal Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum Borneo Law Review Journal LEGAL BRIEF Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public Policy ARSY : Jurnal Aplikasi Riset kepada Masyarakat JHCLS Indonesian Community Journal Yuridika Bina Hukum Lingkungan Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice Kanun: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan SASI Lex Scientia Law Review
Suparto Suparto
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Islam Riau
Religion Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Humanities Computer Science & IT Economics, Econometrics & Finance Environmental Science Health Professions Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Public Health Social Sciences Other

Published : 55 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search
Journal : SASI

 1 
Pelaksanaan Sistem Pemerintahan Presidensial Dengan Multi Partai Di Indonesia Suparto Suparto
SASI Vol 27, No 4 (2021): Volume 27 Nomor 4, Oktober - Desember 2021
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Pattimura

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47268/sasi.v27i4.600

Abstract

The government system in post-reform Indonesia is a presidential system with many parties. The advantage of this system is that it is more democratic because many parties are considered to accommodate the wishes and interests of people from various backgrounds through political parties, while the weakness is that it is difficult for the ruling party if it is not in the majority. The purpose of this study was to determine the implementation of a presidential system of multi-party governance in post-reform Indonesia. The results of the study are that in a presidential government system with many parties (multi-party system) such as in Indonesia, it will cause problems if no political party wins the election with a majority vote, the President must build a coalition with a number of political parties that have representatives in the House of Representatives (DPR). DPR). Since the holding of the 1999 and 2004 elections, there have been efforts to simplify political parties, by reducing the number of election participants through the electoral threshold and then changing since 2009 to reducing the number of political parties that may sit in parliament by using the minimum threshold requirement (parliamentary threshold). However, this method has not been successful because there are still relatively many political parties sitting in parliament, this is due to the parliamentary threshold that is too small. Ideally, the parliamentary threshold, which was previously 4% in the 2019 election, is raised to 8% in the 2024 election. Thus, a strong, effective and stable presidential government system with only 4 (four) to 6 (six) political parties will be realized.
Problematika Pengujian Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Mahkamah Agung ( Kajian Terhadap Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 65 P/HUM/2018) Suparto Suparto
SASI Vol 27, No 1 (2021): Volume 27 Nomor 1, Januari - Maret 2021
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Pattimura

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47268/sasi.v27i1.417

Abstract

The Supreme Court (MA) decided that candidates for members of the Regional Representative Council (DPD) from political party administrators for the 2019 Election were still allowed, even though previously the Constitutional Court (MK) had banned it (Decision No. This conflict is due to differences in interpreting the timing of the implementation of the ongoing 2019 Election stage process. The Constitutional Court stated that the decision was enforced since the 2019 Election and this was not retroactive. Because it is still at the Provisional Candidate List (DCS) stage, so it is possible to change regulations. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court considers that the Constitutional Court's decision must be enforced after the 2019 Election or apply in the future (prospective), because the stages have been running, so that changes in requirements can be made The legal implication that occurs is that there is legal uncertainty for the General Election Commission (KPU) to follow which decision. To solve this problem can be used the doctrine of validity (enforceability of norms). The existence of a hierarchy of legal products being tested and a basis for testing certainly has a legal consequence of the existence of a hierarchy of norm validity in the decisions of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. When there is a conflict between the Supreme Court decision and the Constitutional Court, the verdict with the basis and object of examination in the hierarchy of laws and regulations that is higher, namely the Constitutional Court decision, has a higher validity than the Supreme Court decision. So that problems like this do not exist anymore, testing of laws and regulations should only be carried out by one institution, namely the Constitutional Court.
Kontroversi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Membatalkan Kewenangan Komisi Yudisial Melakukan Rekrutmen Terhadap Hakim Suparto Suparto
SASI Vol 26, No 2 (2020): Volume 26 Nomor 2, April - Juni 2020
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Pattimura

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47268/sasi.v26i2.252

Abstract

The Supreme Court conducted a selection of judges without the involvement of the Judiciary Committee. The Judiciary Committee deemed the recruitment was violating the law since it was not involving them in the process. While the Supreme Court viewed that the implementation guidelines for the mutual regulation of the Judiciary Committee and Supreme Court was yet to be existed, while the need for fresh judges was deemed as urgent at that time. Based on that premise, the Supreme Court conducted the recruitment and appointment of judges, several supreme court judges and registrars were conducting a judicial review on the Law No. 49 of 2009, Law No. 50 of 2009, and Law No. 51 of 2009.The Constitutional Court granted their plea with Stipulation No. 43/PUU-XIII/2015.One of the points of considerations of the constitutional judges was the involvement of Judiciary Committee on the recruitment of judges was deemed to disrupt the independency of the Supreme Court. Actually, the involvement of the Judiciary Committee in the selection of judges will not intrude the independency of the judicial power or the judge itself. The independency of judges will be disrupted if the Judiciary Committee is intervening with the technical aspect of judicial power which includescross-examination, trial, and the verdict on a case.
Co-Authors A Admiral Adinda, Fadhel Arjuna Admiral , Admiral Admiral Admiral Akbar, Aryo Ardiansyah Ardiansyah ARDIANSYAH ARDIANSYAH Chatarina Umbul Wahyuni David Hardiago Dedy Gusniawan Deni Jaya Saputra Despan Heryansyah Efendi Ibnu Susilo Efendi Ibnususilo Ellydar Chaidir Ellydar Chaidir, Ellydar Esanov, Azamat Esirgapovich Faishal Taufiqurrahman Halimah Abdul Manaf Heni Pujiastuti Hyeonsoo, Kim M. Rafi Monika Melina Muhammad Faizal Pahlevi Namazovna, Sultanova Dilshoda Naurah Dwirengganis Riata Putri Normurotovna, Zamira Esanova Pahmi Amri Puti Mayang Seruni Riauan, Muhd Ar. Imam Santos, Jose Gama Susilo, Efendi Ibnu Syafrinaldi, Rani Fadhila Umi Muslikhah Wira Atma Hajri, Wira Atma Zainal