Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Konstitusi Jurnal Konstitusi
Luthfi Widagdo Eddyono
Mahkamah Konstitusi
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Other

Published : 4 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 4 Documents
Search

 1 
Tinjauan Pengaturan Hukum Konservasi Sumber Daya Alam Hayati dalam Berbagai Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Luthfi Widagdo Eddyono
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 (427.993 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1826

Abstract

Law No. 5 Year 1990 on Conservation of Biological Resources and Ecosystem must be relevant and in harmony with regulation and Constitutional Court decisions. The issues of this article are : (1) How is the harmony between Law No. 5 Year 1990 on Conservation of Biological Resources and Ecosystem with other regulations ?; 2) how is the accordance between Law No. 5 Year 1990 on Conservation of Biological Resources and Ecosystem with Constitutional Court decisions? This is a normative research with conceptual and regulations approach. This article use secondary data with interactive model analysis. This research shows that : (1) Law No. 5 Year 1990 on Conservation of Biological Resources and Ecosystem has not considered Basic Agrarian Law and People’s Consultative Assembly No. IX/MPR/2001 as base of natural resources regulation. This regulation is neither according to other regulations nor responsive because this has not regulated modern biotechnology and genetic resources. (2) Law No. 5 Year 1990 on Conservation of Biological Resources and Ecosystem is not according to Constitutional Court Decision that emphasize on preventive aspect of natural resources management, protection and respect of indigenous people and substantive public participation. In another side, this regulation emphasize on curative aspect, irrespect and not protect indigenous people. This article recommends revision of this regulation and accord it with Constitutional Court Decision.
Quo Vadis Pancasila sebagai Norma Konstitusi yang Tidak Dapat Diubah Luthfi Widagdo Eddyono
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 16, No 3 (2019)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (453.874 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1637

Abstract

Pancasila memiliki posisi khusus dalam UUD 1945, Selain Pasal 37 ayat (5) UUD 1945 yang menyatakan, “khusus mengenai bentuk Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia tidak dapat dilakukan perubahan,” Pancasila yang narasinya terdapat dalam Alinea Keempat Pembukaan UUD 1945 merupakan salah satu norma konstitusi yang tidak dapat diubah (unamendable article). Hal ini dikarenakan Pasal 37 ayat (1) UUD 1945 menyatakan hanya pasal-pasal UUD 1945 yang dapat diubah, sedangkan Pembukaan UUD 1945 bukanlah termasuk pasal UUD 1945. Tulisan ini bermaksud untuk mencari tahu kaitan antara kedudukan Pancasila dalam ketatanegaraan Indonesia dan keberadaannya sebagai norma konstitusi yang tidak dapat diubah. Lebih lanjut, tulisan ini akan melihat konteks sejarah penentuan Pancasila sebagai dasar negara dan upaya untuk memasukan Pancasila dalam pasal UUD 1945. Selain itu, tulisan ini akan mengkaji putusan-putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang menyebut Pancasila sebagai sumber hukum dan dasar negara. Menurut Penulis, sebutan “Pancasila” perlu ditetapkan dalam pasal-pasal UUD 1945 untuk menegaskan secara expressis verbis bahwa Pancasila merupakan dasar negara atau ideologi bangsa. Hal ini penting untuk menjadikan Pancasila tidak sekedar sebagai jargon semata yang bahkan nama Pancasila tidak tersebutkan dalam UUD 1945 meskipun narasinya terdapat dalam Pembukaan UUD 1945.Pancasila has a special position in the 1945 Constitution, in addition to Article 37 paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution which states, "specifically regarding the form of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, changes cannot be made," Pancasila which the narrative is contained in the Fourth Paragraph of the Opening of the 1945 Constitution is one of the constitutional norms that can not be changed (unamendable article). This is because Article 37 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution states that only the articles of the 1945 Constitution can be amended, while the Preamble to the 1945 Constitution does not belong to the 1945 Constitution. This paper intends to find out the relationship between the position of the Pancasila in Indonesian constitution and its existence as a constitutional norm which cannot be changed. Furthermore, this paper will look at the historical context of the determination of Pancasila as the basis of the state and efforts to include Pancasila in the 1945 Constitution article. In addition, this paper will examine the decisions of the Constitutional Court which called Pancasila as a source of law and the basis of the state. According to the author, the term "Pancasila" needs to be stipulated in the articles of the 1945 Constitution to expressly state that Pancasila is the basis of the state or ideology of the nation. It is important to make Pancasila not merely a jargon that even the name of Pancasila is not mentioned in the 1945 Constitution although the narrative is contained in the Preamble to the 1945 Constitution.  
Tinjauan Pengaturan Hukum Konservasi Sumber Daya Alam Hayati dalam Berbagai Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Luthfi Widagdo Eddyono
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 (427.993 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1826

Abstract

Law No. 5 Year 1990 on Conservation of Biological Resources and Ecosystem must be relevant and in harmony with regulation and Constitutional Court decisions. The issues of this article are : (1) How is the harmony between Law No. 5 Year 1990 on Conservation of Biological Resources and Ecosystem with other regulations ?; 2) how is the accordance between Law No. 5 Year 1990 on Conservation of Biological Resources and Ecosystem with Constitutional Court decisions? This is a normative research with conceptual and regulations approach. This article use secondary data with interactive model analysis. This research shows that : (1) Law No. 5 Year 1990 on Conservation of Biological Resources and Ecosystem has not considered Basic Agrarian Law and People’s Consultative Assembly No. IX/MPR/2001 as base of natural resources regulation. This regulation is neither according to other regulations nor responsive because this has not regulated modern biotechnology and genetic resources. (2) Law No. 5 Year 1990 on Conservation of Biological Resources and Ecosystem is not according to Constitutional Court Decision that emphasize on preventive aspect of natural resources management, protection and respect of indigenous people and substantive public participation. In another side, this regulation emphasize on curative aspect, irrespect and not protect indigenous people. This article recommends revision of this regulation and accord it with Constitutional Court Decision.
Quo Vadis Pancasila sebagai Norma Konstitusi yang Tidak Dapat Diubah Luthfi Widagdo Eddyono
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 16, No 3 (2019)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (453.874 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1637

Abstract

Pancasila memiliki posisi khusus dalam UUD 1945, Selain Pasal 37 ayat (5) UUD 1945 yang menyatakan, “khusus mengenai bentuk Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia tidak dapat dilakukan perubahan,” Pancasila yang narasinya terdapat dalam Alinea Keempat Pembukaan UUD 1945 merupakan salah satu norma konstitusi yang tidak dapat diubah (unamendable article). Hal ini dikarenakan Pasal 37 ayat (1) UUD 1945 menyatakan hanya pasal-pasal UUD 1945 yang dapat diubah, sedangkan Pembukaan UUD 1945 bukanlah termasuk pasal UUD 1945. Tulisan ini bermaksud untuk mencari tahu kaitan antara kedudukan Pancasila dalam ketatanegaraan Indonesia dan keberadaannya sebagai norma konstitusi yang tidak dapat diubah. Lebih lanjut, tulisan ini akan melihat konteks sejarah penentuan Pancasila sebagai dasar negara dan upaya untuk memasukan Pancasila dalam pasal UUD 1945. Selain itu, tulisan ini akan mengkaji putusan-putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang menyebut Pancasila sebagai sumber hukum dan dasar negara. Menurut Penulis, sebutan “Pancasila” perlu ditetapkan dalam pasal-pasal UUD 1945 untuk menegaskan secara expressis verbis bahwa Pancasila merupakan dasar negara atau ideologi bangsa. Hal ini penting untuk menjadikan Pancasila tidak sekedar sebagai jargon semata yang bahkan nama Pancasila tidak tersebutkan dalam UUD 1945 meskipun narasinya terdapat dalam Pembukaan UUD 1945.Pancasila has a special position in the 1945 Constitution, in addition to Article 37 paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution which states, "specifically regarding the form of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, changes cannot be made," Pancasila which the narrative is contained in the Fourth Paragraph of the Opening of the 1945 Constitution is one of the constitutional norms that can not be changed (unamendable article). This is because Article 37 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution states that only the articles of the 1945 Constitution can be amended, while the Preamble to the 1945 Constitution does not belong to the 1945 Constitution. This paper intends to find out the relationship between the position of the Pancasila in Indonesian constitution and its existence as a constitutional norm which cannot be changed. Furthermore, this paper will look at the historical context of the determination of Pancasila as the basis of the state and efforts to include Pancasila in the 1945 Constitution article. In addition, this paper will examine the decisions of the Constitutional Court which called Pancasila as a source of law and the basis of the state. According to the author, the term "Pancasila" needs to be stipulated in the articles of the 1945 Constitution to expressly state that Pancasila is the basis of the state or ideology of the nation. It is important to make Pancasila not merely a jargon that even the name of Pancasila is not mentioned in the 1945 Constitution although the narrative is contained in the Preamble to the 1945 Constitution.  
Co-Authors