Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.562
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Konstitusi Jurist-Diction Jurnal Konstitusi
Irene Angelita Rugian
Universitas Airlangga
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences Other

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Prinsip Proporsionalitas dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (Studi Perbandingan di Indonesia dan Jerman) Irene Angelita Rugian
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 18, No 2 (2021)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (397.749 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1829

Abstract

The judicial review of UUD 1945 is the authority of the Constitutional Court declared by Article 24C UUD NRI 1945. One of the reasons for judicial review is competiting rights or the constitutional rights of citizens who have been violated through existing laws, so there needs to be an examination of the law these laws. It is also known that some of the judges’ decisions in competiting rights cases only use the interpretation of the constitution without considering the impairment of rights delivered by the applicant in the examination. Thus resulting in a decision stating that the law does not conflict with the constitution. This hurts citizens who feel their rights have been violated. A balance is needed between the public interest and the constitutional rights of citizens. The counterweight can use the principle of proportionality. The principle of proportionality is needed by the constitutional judge in his consideration when faced with a case of competiting rights. But unfortunately, this principle is not always used when faced with competiting rights, and the principle was not developed by Constitutional Court judges. In this paper the problem to be answered is first the history of the principle of proportionality, secondly the comparison of the use of the principle of proportionality in constitutional justice in Germany and Indonesia. The problem was answered using normative legal research methods. The main material is the decision of the Constitutional Court and supporting materials in the form of books and journals. The conclusion in this paper is the need to use the principle of proportionality in dealing with competiting rights cases in the Constitutional Court. So it is necessary to immediately develop the principle of proportionality and its parameters.
Prinsip Proporsionalitas dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang Terhadap UUD NRI 1945 (Studi Perbandingan di Indonesia dan Jerman) Irene Angelita Rugian
Jurist-Diction Vol. 4 No. 4 (2021): Volume 4 No. 4, Juli 2021
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Airlangga

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20473/jd.v4i4.28482

Abstract

AbstractIn several decisions that have been decided by the Mahkamah Konstitusi, some of the judges considerations only test norms with benchmarks contrary to the UUD NRI 1945 or not? However, MK has not tested the basis of the petition itself, there are limitation of rights, open legal policy, and the real harm felt by the petitioner. Therefore, it is necessary to have a principle of proportionality that can be used by judges to assist in deciding cases related to limiting rights and open legal policy. In order to know the concept of the principle of proportionality, it is necessary to conduct a comparative study between Indonesia and Germany by analyzing the concept and development of this principle. The method used is legal research with a statute approach, a case approach, a comparative approach and a conceptual approach. From the results of these studies, it was found that the principle of proportionality in Germany was well conceptualized and developed rapidly. In fact, this principle has become a general principle in the Germany Federal Constitutional Court. Meanwhile in Indonesia, this principle is still unknown and undeveloped like Germany.Keywords: The Principle of Proportionality; Legitimate Aim; Suitability; Neccesity; Balancing in Narrow Sense.AbstrakDalam beberapa putusan yang telah diputus oleh MK, beberapa pertimbangan hakim hanya menguji norma dengan tolak ukur bertentangan dengan UUD NRI 1945 atau tidak? Namun, MK belum menguji sampai kepada dasar dari permohonan itu sendiri, yaitu pembatasan hak, open legal policy, dan kerugian yang nyata dirasakan oleh pemohon. Maka dari itu, perlu adanya prinsip proporsionalitas yang dapat digunakan para hakim untuk membantu memutus perkara yang berkaitan dengan pembatasan hak dan open legal policy. Agar mengetahui konsep dari prinsip proporsionalitas, maka perlu melakukan studi perbandingan antara Indonesia dan Jerman dengan menganalisis konsep dan perkembangan prinsip tersebut. Metode yang digunakan adalah legal research dengan pendekatan statute approach, case approach, comparative approach dan conceptual appoach. Hasil penelitian ditemukan bahwa prinsip proporsionalitas di Jerman telah terkonsep dengan baik dan berkembang dengan pesat. Bahkan prinsip tersebut telah menjadi prinsip umum dalam Germany Federal Constitutional Court. Sedangkan di Indonesia, prinsip tersebut masih belum dikenal oleh MK. Sehingga, proporsionalitas belum memiliki konsep yang jelas dan tidak berkembang seperti negara Jerman.Kata Kunci: Prinsip Proporsionalitas; Legitimate Aim; Suitability; Neccesity; Balancing in Narrow Sense.
Prinsip Proporsionalitas dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (Studi Perbandingan di Indonesia dan Jerman) Irene Angelita Rugian
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol. 18 No. 2 (2021)
Publisher : Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (397.749 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1829

Abstract

The judicial review of UUD 1945 is the authority of the Constitutional Court declared by Article 24C UUD NRI 1945. One of the reasons for judicial review is competiting rights or the constitutional rights of citizens who have been violated through existing laws, so there needs to be an examination of the law these laws. It is also known that some of the judges’ decisions in competiting rights cases only use the interpretation of the constitution without considering the impairment of rights delivered by the applicant in the examination. Thus resulting in a decision stating that the law does not conflict with the constitution. This hurts citizens who feel their rights have been violated. A balance is needed between the public interest and the constitutional rights of citizens. The counterweight can use the principle of proportionality. The principle of proportionality is needed by the constitutional judge in his consideration when faced with a case of competiting rights. But unfortunately, this principle is not always used when faced with competiting rights, and the principle was not developed by Constitutional Court judges. In this paper the problem to be answered is first the history of the principle of proportionality, secondly the comparison of the use of the principle of proportionality in constitutional justice in Germany and Indonesia. The problem was answered using normative legal research methods. The main material is the decision of the Constitutional Court and supporting materials in the form of books and journals. The conclusion in this paper is the need to use the principle of proportionality in dealing with competiting rights cases in the Constitutional Court. So it is necessary to immediately develop the principle of proportionality and its parameters.
Co-Authors