Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
5.134
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal 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 Jurnal Selat Bina Hukum Lingkungan 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 Indonesian Community Journal Yuridika Bina Hukum Lingkungan Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice 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 Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Public Health Social Sciences Other

Published : 52 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 52 Documents
Search

 1   2   3   4   5 
ANALYSIS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COURT VERDICT NUMBER 14/PUU-XI/2013 ON THE PRESIDENTIAL THRESHOLD S Suparto
Jurnal Dinamika Hukum Vol 16, No 3 (2016)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20884/1.jdh.2016.16.3.523

Abstract

In judicial review on Article 9 of Law No. 42 of 2008 on Election of President and Vice-President which regulates presidential threshold, the Constitutional Court declined it since it is an open legal policy mandated by Article 6 paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution that the administration of President and Vice-President election will be further regulated in a Law. This reason is deemed insufficient as the Article 6 paragraph (5) regulates procedures (phases of the process), not requirements for candidates of President and Vice President to be eligible on participating in the election. Moreover, Article 9 of Law No. 42 of 2008 potentially expands the norms as stipulated in Article 6A paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution in which the candidates for President and Vice President shall be nominated by a political party or coalition of political parties participating in the election prior to the election without any other frills (the threshold).The term presidential threshold that is being used up until now is actually incorrect term; instead, presidential candidacy threshold should be considered as the more appropriate term.Keywords: Presidential Election, Presidential threshold, Constitutional Court Verdict.
The Existence of Party Court in Completing the Internal Disputes of Political Parties in Indonesia (A Case Study of Persatuan Pembangunan Party) S Suparto; A Admiral
Jurnal Dinamika Hukum Vol 19, No 1 (2019)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20884/1.jdh.2019.19.1.2497

Abstract

Abstract According to Law Number 2 of 2011, “Any internal conflict inherent a political party, is resolved by that party’s internal organ known as the Internal Dispute Settlement Committee. But unfortunately, not all internal conflicts were ironed out, just as what happened to Persatuan Pembangunan Party. Based on the results of the current study, several factors could be identified to influence the resolution of internal political party disputes, including 1). the inability of the disputed internal party to pay heed to the decision of the Party Court. 2). the government violation of the decision made by the Party Court with biased interference. 3). There is doubtful neutrality considering the membership of the Party Court who comes from internal political parties. 4). Not considering the Party Court's decision while adjudicating disputes over the management of political parties.Keywords: Party Court, Decision, Final.
Teori Pemisahan Kekuasaan dan Konstitusi Menurut Negara Barat dan Islam Suparto Suparto
Hukum Islam Vol 19, No 1 (2019): HUKUM TATA NEGARA, KELUARGA DAN EKONOMI SYARIAH
Publisher : Fakultas Syariah dan hukum Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif Kasim Riau

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24014/hi.v19i1.7044

Abstract

ABSTRACTSeparations of Powers theory had just been developed by John Locke and Montesquieu circa 17 A.C. Theory of Constitution had also just been emerged circa 18 A.C., even though in old Greece many people had already discussed about this theory. whereas Islam has recognized the separation of powers and constitutions long before that, namely when Rasulullah SAW rule Madinah and Madinah Constitution circa 7 A.C..  ABSTRAKTeori Pemisahan Kekuasaan yang dikembangkan oleh John Locke dan Montesquieu baru muncul sekitar abad ke 17, demikian juga dengan munculnya teori dan hukum Konstitusi baru berkembang sekitar abad ke 18, walaupun sebelumnya pada masa Yunani kuno Konstitusi telah banyak dibicarakan. Sedangkan Islam telah mengenal adanya Pemisahan Kekuasaan dan Konstitusi jauh sebelum itu yaitu pada masa pemerintahan Rasulullah SAW di Negara Madinah dan Konstitusi Madinah yaitu pada abad ke 7.                      
Presidential Threshold Between the Threshold of Candidacy and Threshold of Electability Suparto Suparto
Jurnal Cita Hukum Vol 6, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : Fakultas Syariah dan Hukum, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15408/jch.v6i1.4414

Abstract

Abstract. In judicial review on Article 9 of Law Number 42 of 2008 on The Election of President and Vice-President which regulates Presidential threshold, the Constitutional Court refused on the grounds that it is an open legal policy which mandated by Article 6 paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution that the administration of the election of President and Vice-President will be further regulated in a Law. This reasoning is insufficient because Article 6 paragraph (5) regulates procedures (phases of the process), not requirements for candidates of President and Vice President to be eligible on participating in the election. Moreover Article 9 of Law Number 42 of 2008 has the potential to expand the norms as stipulated in Article 6A paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution that the candidates for President and Vice President shall be nominated by a political party or coalition of political parties participating in the election before the election without any other frills (the threshold). Keywords: Presidential Election, Presidential Threshold  Abstrak. Dalam pengujian Pasal 9 Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 2008 tentang Pemilihan Umum Presiden dan Wakil Presiden mengatur tentang Presidential threshold. Mahkamah Konstitusi menolak dengan alasan hal tersebut merupakan open legal policy dengan bersandarkan pada Pasal 6 ayat (5) Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 bahwa tata laksana pelaksanaan pemilihan Presiden dan Wakil Presiden lebih lanjut diatur dalam Undang-Undang. Argumentasi tersebut kurang tepat karena Pasal 6 ayat (5) mengatur tata laksananya (proses tahapan pelaksanaan) bukan persyaratan bagi pasangan calon Presiden dan Wakil Presiden untuk menjadi peserta pemilu. Selain itu, Pasal 9 Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 2008 tersebut berpotensi memperluas norma sebagaimana yang diatur dalam Pasal 6A ayat (2) Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 bahwa pasangan calon Presiden dan Wakil Presiden diusulkan oleh partai politik atau gabungan partai politik  peserta pemilu sebelum pemilu  tanpa adanya embel-embel lain (adanya ambang batas).Kata kunci: Pemilu Presiden, Presidential Threshold.
KEDUDUKAN DAN KEWENANGAN KOMISI YUDISIAL DI BEBERAPA NEGARA EROPA (IRLANDIA, PERANCIS DAN ITALIA) Suprapto Suprapto
Syiar Hukum Volume 14, No 2 (2012) : Syiar Hukum : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Islam Bandung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29313/sh.v14i1.1447

Abstract

Salah satu alasan didirikannya Komisi Yudisial di Negara Eropa adalah untuk membangkitkan kembali kepercayaan publik terhadap dunia peradilan dan menjadi lembaga negara yang menjadi penghubung antara kekuasaan pemerintah (executive power) dalam hal ini Departemen Kehakiman dengan kekuasaan kehakiman (judicial power). Sampai saat ini sudah 27 negara di Eropa yang mempunyai lembaga negara sejenis Komisi Yudisial. Komisi Yudisial di Irlandia disebut dengan Courts Service, di Perancis disebut Conseil Superieur de la Magistrature dan di Italia disebut dengan Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura. Komisi Yudisial di Eropa Utara yang diwakili oleh Irlandia memiliki tanggung jawab dan kewenangan pada area kebijakan teknis dan pembuatan kebijakan pada bidang peradilan. Sedangkan Komisi Yudisial di Eropa Selatan yang diwakili oleh Perancis dan Italia memiliki kewenangan dalam hal penentuan karir, rekruitmen hakim, pendidikan dan training hakim, mutasi dan promosi hakim serta penegakan disiplin.
Keadilan Pemilu Dalam Perkara Pidana Pemilu: Studi terhadap Putusan Pengadilan Suparto; Despan Heryansyah
Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM Vol. 29 No. 2: MEI 2022
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Islam Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20885/iustum.vol29.iss2.art6

Abstract

Electoral justice can be seen from at least two important aspects, namely the procedure of the election implementation and the mechanism for resolving election-related offences. Election-related offences are understood as actions that are contrary to the provisions of laws and regulations relating to elections. One of the said election-related offences is resolved through the District Court. However, reflecting on the completion of criminal acts in the 2019 legislative elections, electoral justice has not been successful. Of all the decisions of the District Courts in Yogyakarta and West Sumatra that have been analyzed, all of them issued probation to the perpetrator, regardless of the position of the perpetrator, the type of crime, and other aggravating reasons at trial. This study looks at the tendency of judges in deciding cases of election criminal violations and encourages the optimization of electoral justice in these decisions. This normative legal research emphasizes the use of secondary data, especially the decisions of District Court judges in Yogyakarta and West Sumatra. The results of the study show that first, the tendency of decisions to give very light sentences to perpetrators. Second, electoral justice has not been optimally obtained through the District Court because of the lightness of the sentence issued. This is because judges only consider the juridical aspect alone, without seeing the election as a real implementation of the sovereignty of the people as well as various other philosophical and sociological considerations. Key Worsd: Electoral justice; election crime; judge decision Abstrak Keadilan pemilu setidaknya dapat dilihat dari dua aspek penting, yaitu terkait prosedur pelaksanaan Pemilu dan mekanisme penyelesaian pelanggaran Pemilu. Pelanggaran Pemilu dipahami sebagai tindakan yang bertentangan dengan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan terkait Pemilu. Salah satu pelanggaran Pemilu dimaksud diselesaikan melalui Pengadilan Negeri. Namun, bercermin pada penyelesaian tindak pidana pemilu legislatif 2019 lalu, keadilan pemilu belum berhasil diwujudkan. Dari keseluruhan putusan Pengadilan Negeri di DIY dan Sumatera Barat yang dianalisis, seluruhnya memberikan pidana percobaan kepada pelaku, tanpa memperhatikan kedudukan pelaku, jenis tindak pidana, dan alasan pemberat lainnya di persidangan. Penelitian ini melihat kecenderungan hakim dalam memutus perkara pelanggaran pidana pemilu dan mendorong optimalisasi keadilan pemilu dalam putusan tersebut. Penelitian hukum normatif ini menekankan pada penggunaan data sekunder, terutama putusan hakim Pengadilan Negeri di DIY dan Sumatera Barat. Hasil penelitian menyimpulkan bahwa pertama, kecenderungan putusan memberikan hukuman yang sangat ringan terhadap pelaku. Kedua, keadilan pemilu belum optimal didapatkan melalui Pengadilan Negeri karena ringannya hukuman yang dijatuhkan. Ini disebabkan hakim hanya mempertimbangkan aspek yuridis semata, tanpa melihat pemilu sebagai implementasi nyata dari kedaulatan rakyat serta berbagai pertimbangan folosofis dan sosiologis lainnya. Kata Kunci: Keadillan pemilu; tindak pidana pemilu; putusan hakim
The Implication of Constitutional Court Decision Number 36/PUU-XV/2017 on the Independence of Corruption Eradication Commission Suparto Suparto; Dedy Gusniawan
UNIFIKASI : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Vol 7, No 1 (2020)
Publisher : Universitas Kuningan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25134/unifikasi.v7i1.2547

Abstract

This study aims to find out the considerations of the Constitutional Court Judge in issuing Constitutional Court Decision No. 36/PUU-XV/2017 as well as to identify the implications of the Decision on the Independence of Corruption Eradication Commission. The method used in this study was normative juridical method. The data collected through library research were then analyzed analytic-descriptive. The formulations of the problem are; 1) What are the considerations of the Constitutional Court Judge in issuing Constitutional Court Decision No. 36/PUU-XV/2017 against judicial review of Law No. 17 of 2017 concerning MD3? and 2) What are the implications of the Constitutional Court Decision No. 36/PUU-XV/2017 against judicial review of Law No. 17 of 2017 concerning MD3 on the independence of Corruption Eradication Commission? As results, it was found that; 1) in Constitutional Court Decision No. 36/PUU-XV/2017, the Constitutional Court states that the inquiry right owned by the House of Representatives over the Corruption Eradication Commission is constitutional as long as it does not relate to the authority of investigation and prosecution owned by the Corruption Eradication Commission with the consideration that the Corruption Eradication Commission is a state institution that includes to the realm of executives; and 2) The House of Representatives will give a strong influence on the Corruption Eradication Commission even though the inquiry right owned by the House of Representatives cannot touch the authority of the Corruption Eradication Commission in conducting investigations and prosecutions. However, there is an indication that the effort to provide inquiry right is not a legal effort but rather a political effort which is widely applied in countries adhering to a parliamentary system where the parliament tends to be more dominant than the executive. Hence, it can be concluded that; 1) in this Decision, the Constitutional Court Judge did not use a stronger grammatical and systematic interpretation based on the original intense. Besides, this Decision is ambiguous and potentially contradicts with the previous Decision, namely Constitutional Court Decision No.012-016-019/PUU-IV/2006; and 2)  there will be consequences for the Corruption Eradication Commission in the future, especially in terms of independence, since it can be used as an object of inquiry right by the House of Representatives. Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 36/Puu-Xv/2017 Terhadap Independensi Komisi Pemberantasan KorupsiTujuan dari pennelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui pertimbangan Hakim Konstitusi dalam memutus perkara No. 36/PUU-XV/2017 dan Implikasi dari putusan tersebut terhadap Independensi Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu  hukum normatif dengan cara studikepustakaan,data yang digunakan  adalah data sekunder dananalisis data dilakukan secara deskriptis analitis. Rumusan masalahnya  adalah (1). Bagaimanakah pertimbangan Hakim  Konstitusi dalam memutus perkara No. 36/PUU-XV/2017 terhadap pengujian UU No. 17 Tahun 2017 Tentang MD3 dan (2). Bagaimanakah implikasi putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi  No.36/PUU-XV/2017 terhadap pengujian UU No. 17 Tahun 2017 Tentang MD3 terhadap independensi Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi. Berdasarkan penelitian diperoleh hasil (1) MK dalam putusan No. 36/PUU-XV/2017 menyatakan  bahwa kewenangan hak angket yang dilakukan  Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat  terhadap Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi adalah konstitusional sepanjang tidak menyangkut kewenangan penyidikan, penyelidikan, dan penuntutan yang dimiliki oleh Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi, dengan pertimbangan  Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi adalah lembaga negara yang termasuk ranah eksekutif. (2). Pengaruh tekanan yang diberikan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat  kepada Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi akan amat kuat walaupun hak angket tersebut tidak dapat menyentuh kewenangan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi dalam melakukan penyidikan, penyelidikan, dan penuntutan. Namun ada indikasi bahwa upaya angket pada dasarnya bukanlah upaya hukum melainkan upaya yang bersifat politis yang banyak dipraktekkan dalam negara penganut sistem parlementer yang cenderung dominan parlemen dibanding pihak eksekutif.Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah (1).  Dalam putusan ini Hakim Konstitusi tidak  menggunakan penafsiran gramatikal dan sistematis yang lebih kuat dengan berlandaskan pada original intens. Selain ituPutusan Mahkamah Konstitusi ini adalah ambigu dan  berpotensi bertentangan dengan putusan sebelumnya yaitu putusan  Mahkamah Konstitusi  No.012-016-019/PUU-IV/2006.(2)  Adanya konsekuensi bagi Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi dimasa mendatang khususnya dalam hal independensi  akibatdari dapat dijadikannya objek hak angket oleh Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat
THE COMPARISON BETWEEN THE JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA AND THE NETHERLANDS COUNCIL FOR THE JUDICIARY Suparto Suparto
UNIFIKASI : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Vol 6, No 1 (2019)
Publisher : Universitas Kuningan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25134/unifikasi.v6i1.1527

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze the position and authority of the Judicial Commission of the Republic of Indonesia and its comparison to the Netherlands Council for the Judiciary. This comparative study applied a normative juridical method. The data used in this study were secondary data. The collected data were then analyzed qualitatively. The results showed that Judicial Commission has an important position in judicial system in Indonesia so as structurally, its position is aligned with the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Yet, functionally, its role is auxiliary to the judicial power institutions. Although the function of the Judicial Commission is related to judicial power, but the Judicial Commission is not an agent of judicial power, rather, it is an agency enforcing code of ethics of judges. Besides, the Judicial Commission is also not involved in the organization, personnel, administration and financial matters of judges. This condition is different from the Judicial Commission in European countries, such as the Netherlands. The Judicial Commission in the Netherlands (The Netherlands Council for the Judiciary) has an authority in the area of technical policy and policy making in the field of justice. The Netherlands Council for the Judiciary and other Judicial Commission in European countries generally have the authority in managing organization, budget and administration as well as in conducting promotions, transfers, and recruitments as well as imposing sanctions on judges. Thus, the Supreme Court only focuses on carrying out judicial functions and does not deal with administrative and judicial organization matters. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui dan memahami tentang kedudukan dan kewenangan Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia serta perbandingannya dengan Komisi Yudisial Belanda. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu yuridis normatif dengan cara perbandingan (komparatif). Data yang digunakan adalah data sekunder sedangkan analisis data dilakukan secara kualitatif. Hasil penelitian yaitu bahwa kedudukan Komisi Yudisial sangat penting, sehinggasecara struktural kedudukannya diposisikan sederajat dengan Mahkamah Agung dan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Namun demikian  secara fungsionalperannya bersifat penunjang (auxiliary) terhadap lembaga kekuasaan kehakiman. Komisi Yudisial meskipun fungsinya terkait dengan kekuasaan kehakiman tetapi bukan  pelaku kekuasaan kehakiman, melainkan lembaga penegak norma etik (code of ethics) dari hakim. Selain itu Komisi Yudisial juga tidak terlibat dalam hal organisasi, personalia, administrasi dan keuangan para hakim. Hal ini berbeda dengan Komisi Yudisial yang ada di negara Eropa misalnya Belanda. Komisi Yudisial di Belanda (Netherland Council for Judiciary) memiliki kewenangan pada area kebijakan teknis dan pembuatan kebijakan pada bidang peradilan.Komisi Yudisial Belanda dan di Eropa pada umumnya mempunyai kewenangan dalam hal mengelola organisasi, anggaran dan administrasi peradilan termasuk dalam melakukan promosi, mutasi, rekruitmen dan memberikan sanksi terhadap hakim. Mahkamah Agung hanya fokus melaksanakan fungsi peradilan yaitu mengadili
The Position and Function of the Regional Representative Council in Constitutional System of Indonesia According to the Regional Autonomy Laws: A Shift from Legislative to Regional Executive Suparto Suparto
UNIFIKASI : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Vol 8, No 1 (2021)
Publisher : Universitas Kuningan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25134/unifikasi.v8i1.3577

Abstract

This study aims to determine the position and function of the Regional Representative Council (DPRD) in the constitutional system of Indonesia. The study employed a normative legal approach and was analyzed qualitatively using secondary data. The finding revealed the position and function of the DPRD, an element of regional government administration, is currently regulated in one law, Law no. 23 of 2014 concerning Regional Government which previously regulated in the Law on the MPR, DPR, DPD, and DPRD. The DPRD has been regarded as a regional legislative council. In fact, a country adheres to the Unitary State concept do not familiar with regional legislatures. Even though, there is only one legislative council at the regional center, the DPR RI. In the previous law, Law no. 32/2004 states that DPRD has legislative, budgeting, and supervisory functions. The legislative function of the DPRD has resulted in ambiguity on the DPRD's position, a legislative council or part of the executive branch. This is because the function of legislative is to create laws owned by the legislative council. In this case, the DPR. Meanwhile, the DPRD only has the authority to formulate Perda. Based on Law no. 23 of 2014, the DPRD no longer has a legislative function. It is replaced by the function of forming a regional regulation. The DPRD which has been regarded as a regional legislative council, has begun to shift towards the regional executive
PERBEDAAN TAFSIR MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM MEMUTUS PERKARA PEMILIHAN UMUM SERENTAK Suparto Suparto
Jurnal Yudisial Vol 10, No 1 (2017): ABROGATIO LEGIS
Publisher : Komisi Yudisial RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29123/jy.v10i1.39

Abstract

ABSTRAKSelama ini pemilu presiden dan pemilu legislatif dilakukan secara terpisah atau tidak serentak. Pemilu legislatif selalu dilakukan sebelum pemilu presiden dan wakil presiden. Pemilihan umum yang dilakukan secara terpisah dianggap lebih banyak dampak negatifnya serta tidak sesuai dengan UUD NRI 1945. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah deskriptif analitis dengan pendekatan peraturan perundangundangan. Rumusan masalahnya adalah bagaimanakah pertimbangan hakim konstitusi dalam memutus Putusan Nomor 14/PUU-XI/2013 sehingga terjadi perbedaan dengan putusan sebelumnya Nomor 51-52-59/PUUVI/ 2008 terkait dengan pelaksanaan pemilu serentak. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pertimbangan hakim konstitusi dalam memutus Putusan Nomor 14/PUUXI/ 2013 tentang pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 2008 tentang Pemilihan Umum Presiden dan Wakil Presiden terjadi inkonsistensi. Putusan Nomor 14/ PUU-XI/2013 memutuskan bahwa pemilu presiden dan wakil presiden harus dilaksanakan secara bersamaan dengan pemilu anggota DPR, DPR, dan DPRD. Sedangkan dalam putusan sebelumnya yaitu Putusan Nomor 51-52-59/PUU-VI/2008 pada pengujian pasal dan undang-undang yang sama (Pasal 3 ayat (5) Undang- Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 2008), Mahkamah Konstitusi memutuskan bahwa pemilu presiden dan wakil presiden yang dilaksanakan setelah pemilu anggota DPR, DPD, dan DPRD (tidak serentak) adalah tidak bertentangan dengan UUD NRI 1945 (konstitusional). Terjadinya pertentangan putusan ini antara lain disebabkan oleh perbedaan pilihan penafsiran konstitusi.Kata kunci: inkonsistensi, mahkamah konstitusi, pemilu serentak. ABSTRACTDuring this time, the presidential and legislative elections are conducted separately or not simultaneously. The Legislative Elections are always carried out prior to the General Elections of the President and Vice President. The general election is conducted separately as considerably having more negative impacts and inconsistency with the 1945 Constitution. This analysis uses descriptive analysis method with the pertinent laws and regulations approach. The formulation of the issue is what the Constitutional Court Justices took into consideration in its Decision Number 14/PUU-XI/2013 leading to differences to that of its previous Decision Number 51- 52-59/PUU-VI/2008 concerning the implementation of simultaneous elections. The analysis results show inconsistencies in the consideration of the Constitutional Court Justices in ruling the case through the Decision Number 14/PUU-X/2013 on the judicial review of Law Number 42 of 2008 concerning the General Elections of the President and Vice President. The Constitutional Court Decision Number 14/PUU-X/2013 decided that the General Election of the President and Vice President should be implemented simultaneously with the Legislative Election for the Member of the House of Representatives, the Regional Representatives Council, and the Regional House of Representatives. As for the previous decision, the Constitutional Court Decision Number 51-52-59/PUU-VI/2008 on the judicial review of the same article and law (Article 3 (5) of Law Number 42 of 2008), the Constitutional Court decided that the elections of the President and Vice President conducted after the Legislative Election for the Member of the House of Representatives, the Regional Representatives Council, and the Regional House of Representatives (not simultaneously) is not contradictory to the 1945 Constitution. The contradiction of these decisions is partly due to the variety of interpretation on the constitution.Keywords: inconsistency, the constitutional court, simultaneous elections.
Co-Authors A Admiral Admiral Admiral Ardiansyah Ardiansyah Aryo Akbar David Hardiago Dedy Gusniawan Deni Jaya Saputra Despan Heryansyah Efendi Ibnu Susilo Efendi Ibnususilo Ellydar Chaidir Faishal Taufiqurrahman Halimah Abdul Manaf Heni Pujiastuti Kim Hyeonsoo M. Rafi Monika Melina Muhammad Faizal Pahlevi Naurah Dwirengganis Riata Putri Pahmi Amri Puti Mayang Seruni Rani Fadhila Syafrinaldi Riauan, Muhd Ar. Imam Santos, Jose Gama Susilo, Efendi Ibnu Umi Muslikhah Zainal Zulkifli