Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

Desain Badan Peradilan Khusus Pemilihan Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 97/PUU-XI/2013 Supriyadi Supriyadi; Aminuddin Kasim
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 17, No 3 (2020)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

The Constitutional Court Decision Number 97 / PUU-XI / 2013 is a constitutional affirmation of the Court to relinquish its authority to resolve disputes over the results of regional head and deputy regional head elections. Given that conceptually the elections for regional heads and deputy regional heads are not included in the general election regime. After the decision of the Constitutional Court was issued Law Number 1 of 2015 as amended several times, most recently by Law Number 6 of 2020 which explicitly regulates and mandates the establishment of a special judicial body to handle disputes over election results. Neither the Constitutional Court decisions nor the Laws explain in detail the design of a special court that deals with disputes over election results. Therefore, this paper intends to answer research questions about; first, if the Constitutional Court has put the authority to resolve the election result dispute, what is the direction of the Constitutional Court’s thought in designing the settlement of the election result dispute based on decision Number 97/PUU-XI/2013? Second, the Constitutional Court Decision has been enumerated into the Election Law, is it in line with the Constitutional Court’s thoughts in the decision Number 97/PUU-XI/2013 with the normalization in the Election Law regarding disputes over results? third, how is the design of a special judicial body in line with the decision Number 97/PUU-XI/2013 and the Election Law? The research method used in this research is normative research with a statutory approach, conceptual approach, and case approach, with sources of literature law and prescriptive analysis techniques. The findings of this study are; First, the Decidendi Ratio of the Constitutional Court decision Number 97/ PUU-XI/2013 seems to implicitly place the authority to resolve disputes over the results of the elections as part of the authority of the Supreme Court. Second, the normalization of the Pilkada Law related to the settlement of election result disputes is in line with the Constitutional Court’s decision. Third, the design of a special electoral judiciary body is formed under the Supreme Court.

Desain Badan Peradilan Khusus Pemilihan Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 97/PUU-XI/2013 Supriyadi Supriyadi; Aminuddin Kasim
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 17, No 3 (2020)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

The Constitutional Court Decision Number 97 / PUU-XI / 2013 is a constitutional affirmation of the Court to relinquish its authority to resolve disputes over the results of regional head and deputy regional head elections. Given that conceptually the elections for regional heads and deputy regional heads are not included in the general election regime. After the decision of the Constitutional Court was issued Law Number 1 of 2015 as amended several times, most recently by Law Number 6 of 2020 which explicitly regulates and mandates the establishment of a special judicial body to handle disputes over election results. Neither the Constitutional Court decisions nor the Laws explain in detail the design of a special court that deals with disputes over election results. Therefore, this paper intends to answer research questions about; first, if the Constitutional Court has put the authority to resolve the election result dispute, what is the direction of the Constitutional Court’s thought in designing the settlement of the election result dispute based on decision Number 97/PUU-XI/2013? Second, the Constitutional Court Decision has been enumerated into the Election Law, is it in line with the Constitutional Court’s thoughts in the decision Number 97/PUU-XI/2013 with the normalization in the Election Law regarding disputes over results? third, how is the design of a special judicial body in line with the decision Number 97/PUU-XI/2013 and the Election Law? The research method used in this research is normative research with a statutory approach, conceptual approach, and case approach, with sources of literature law and prescriptive analysis techniques. The findings of this study are; First, the Decidendi Ratio of the Constitutional Court decision Number 97/ PUU-XI/2013 seems to implicitly place the authority to resolve disputes over the results of the elections as part of the authority of the Supreme Court. Second, the normalization of the Pilkada Law related to the settlement of election result disputes is in line with the Constitutional Court’s decision. Third, the design of a special electoral judiciary body is formed under the Supreme Court.

Dinamika Penanganan Pelanggaran Administrasi: Studi Terhadap Kepatuhan Putusan Dan Rekomendasi Bawaslu Terkait Pelanggaran Administrasi Pemilu/Pilkada Supriyadi Supriyadi; Widyatmi Anandy
Jurnal Adhyasta Pemilu Vol. 3 No. 2 (2020): Jurnal Adhyasta Pemilu
Publisher : Badan Pengawas Pemilihan Umum

Bawaslu is an institution that is given the authority to resolve election / election administration violations. The nature of Bawaslu's decisions and recommendations for administrative violations must be followed up by the KPU and its officials, this is confirmed in the provisions of Article 462 of Law No. the administration issued by Bawaslu is not obeyed by the institution implementing the decision / recommendation. Identification of problems: first, what is the nature of mandatory norms in the provisions of the Election / Pilkada Law? Related to follow-up on decisions / recommendations of Bawaslu Administrative Violations? Second, how is the Compliance with the Decision / Recommendation of Administrative Violation of Bawaslu? Third, what factors influence compliance with Bawaslu Administrative Violation Decisions / Recommendations? This research is a normative juridical study with a focus on analyzing decisions / recommendations for administrative violations of Bawaslu. in this study using a statutory approach, a case approach, and a conceptual approach. The data sources used are primary, secondary and tertiary data. The research results and conclusions. First, the "mandatory" norm in the construction of Article 462 of the Election Law and Article 139 paragraph (2) of the Election Law is imperative (order / force). Second, the KPU institutionally still has an attitude of indifference

Money Politics Pada Pemilu 2019: 2019 (Kajian Terhadap Potret Pengawasan Dan Daya Imperatif Hukum Pemilu) Aminuddin Kasim; Supriyadi Supriyadi
Jurnal Adhyasta Pemilu Vol. 2 No. 1 (2019): Jurnal Adhyasta Pemilu
Publisher : Badan Pengawas Pemilihan Umum

The one of legal functions performed by the Election Law is the function of controlling behavior in the context of social and political life . To carry out this function , the Election Law formulates imperative norms so that political behavior complies with election law . The imperative norm is in the form of rules that prohibit money politics during the campaign , the quiet period and when the ballot takes place . Then, if there is a violation of the rule of law , the culprit will face legal proceedings to obtain criminals sanctions in the form of prisons and fines. Identification of the problem in this research is: why the imperative norms of the Election Law are not effective in preventing the practice of money politics, and what factors influence the weak power of the electoral law imperatives so that massive money politics practices occur? That problem is discussed and analyzed in this article. The author uses normative jurisdiction research, besides that the writer also uses the imperative theory of Edward A. Ross, Achmad Ali’s legal function theory and Jimly Asshiddiqie’s law enforcement theory. From this study the authors found that when the 2019 Concurrent Elections took place, the imperative norm was not effective in controlling political behavior expected by the Election Law. The practice of massive money politics took place so that the process of democracy and the 2019 Simultaneous Elections occurred.

Redesigning: Handling Of Indonesian Election Violations Abroad To Realizing Quality 2024 Elections Andi Intan Purnamasari; Sulbadana Sulbadana; Supriyadi Supriyadi; Aminuddin Kasim
Fiat Justisia: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Vol 17 No 1 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Lampung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25041/fiatjustisia.v17no1.2637

Handling election violations abroad is one of the determinants of the quality of elections in Indonesia. With the rise of cases that occurred abroad during the 2019 general election, it is hoped that this will be a lesson to make an ideal design for handling election violations abroad in 2024. This research is executed differently from existing or previous research, for Example “The novelty of this research will make a significant contribution to determining the means, size, and function of the parliamentary threshold in the legislative election.” The conclusions of the research show that first, the urgency of handling election violations abroad to create order and peace, protect constitutional rights and uphold justice. Second, to realize the ideal design for handling election violations abroad in 2024, it is carried out increasing the number of members of the Overseas General Elections Supervisory committee from 3 to 5 people, making changes to Article 112 letter c, Article 507 of the Election Law, Article 13 paragraph (4) of the Regulation of General Elections Supervisory Agency Number 7 of 2018 and Article 60 paragraph (1) of the Regulation of General Elections Supervisory Agency Number 8 of 2018, and changing the paradigm of law enforcement from compliance level to internalization of legal Compliance in the 2024 elections.

Title

Found 5 Documents
Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title Search

Found 5 Documents Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title

Found 5 Documents
Search