Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Konstitusi Jurnal Konstitusi
Widodo Ekatjahjana
Dosen Fakultas Hukum Universitas Jember. Ketua Umum Asosiasi Pengajar Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi (APHAMK).
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Other

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Mencermati Ratio Decidendi Mk Dalam Putusan Nomor 122/Puu-Vii/2009 Tentang Penderogasian Norma Hukum dan Sifat Putusan PTUN Widodo Ekatjahjana
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 7, No 5 (2010)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (421.331 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk751

Abstract

Ratio decidendi of the Constitutional Court that said he was not an organ that has an authority to review constitutional rights loss of applicant, beside contrary to constitutional protection principles, also contrary to functions of the Constitutional Court as the guardian of the constitution, the protector of citizen’s constitutional rights dan the protector of human rights. The Constitutional Court should avoid to put his legal reasoning (in his ratio decidendi) that verdict of administrative court has not a legal nature – erga omnes. He should become aware that an administrative dispute is a public dispute bound under public law principles.
Mencermati Ratio Decidendi Mk Dalam Putusan Nomor 122/Puu-Vii/2009 Tentang Penderogasian Norma Hukum dan Sifat Putusan PTUN Widodo Ekatjahjana
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 7, No 5 (2010)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (421.331 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk751

Abstract

Ratio decidendi of the Constitutional Court that said he was not an organ that has an authority to review constitutional rights loss of applicant, beside contrary to constitutional protection principles, also contrary to functions of the Constitutional Court as the guardian of the constitution, the protector of citizen’s constitutional rights dan the protector of human rights. The Constitutional Court should avoid to put his legal reasoning (in his ratio decidendi) that verdict of administrative court has not a legal nature – erga omnes. He should become aware that an administrative dispute is a public dispute bound under public law principles.
Co-Authors