Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Analisis: Jurnal Studi Keislaman Jurnal Konstitusi Constitutional Review Jurnal Konstitusi
Luthfi Widagdo Eddyono
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences Other

Published : 13 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 8 Documents
Search
Journal : Jurnal Konstitusi

 1 
Penyelesaian Sengketa Kewenangan Lembaga Negara oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi Eddyono, Luthfi Widagdo
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 7, No 3 (2010)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (906.658 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk%x

Abstract

This article is about settlement disputes of authorities of state institutions by the Constitutional Court of Indonesia. Pursuant to Article 24C Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution in conjunction with Article 10 Paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court Law, the Constitutional Court of Indonesia has the authority to hear at the first and final level, the decision of which shall be final, among others in deciding disputes of authorities of state institutions, the authorities of which are granted by  the Constitution. But, the 1945 Constitution and the Constitutional Court Law not provide enough rules for the Constitutional Court to decide the case, especially about objectum litis and subjectum litis.In the Decision Number 004/SKLNIV/2006  dated  July  12,  2006  the Constitutional Court using gramatical interpretation (grammatische interpretatie) and declare that to decide upon disputes on authority granted by 1945 Constitution, the first thing to consider is the existence  of certain authorities in the Constitution and then to which institutions those authorities are given. Constitutional authority not just textually specified in the 1945 Constitution, but also implicit authority derived from the principal authority, and necessary and proper authority to exercise the principal authority.Related to that, classification of state institutions can be based on the form of power/authority given to the state institution.
Penetapan Anggota Panwaslu oleh Bawaslu: Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 11/Puu-Viii/2010 Eddyono, Luthfi Widagdo
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 8, No 2 (2011)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (343.59 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk%x

Abstract

The Constitutional Court of Indonesia in Decision Number 11/PUU- VIII/2010 stated that the provisions regarding the recruitment of members of the Supervisory Committee for the Election must be nominated by the Provincial/District General Elections Commission is contrary to Article 22E Paragraph (1) and paragraph (5), and Article 28D Paragraphs (1) of the 1945 Constitution. Therefore, to ensure a fair legal certainty and avoid disruption of the elections, the nomination and appointment of members of Supervisory Committee for the Election is conducted by one institution, namely the General Elections Supervisory Body (Bawaslu) or Supervisory Committee for the Election. The decision contains two legal meanings. First, the view that the principle of checks and balances are not only connected with separation of power at the legislative branch, executive branch, and judiciary branch, but also the relationship between “supervisors and the supervised” that based on the proportional rationality inter-state relations. Second, the case number 11/PUU-VIII /2010 actually contain elements of the dispute between the two state institutions, namely the General Elections Commission and Bawaslu because not only related to the interpretation of norms, but also the fate of members of 192 Supervisory Committee Election that not recognized and approved by the General Elections Commission. The problem handled by Constitutional Court using judicial review case against the 1945 Constitution.
Wacana Desentralisasi Partai Politik: Kajian Original Intent dan Pemaknaan Sistematik UUD 1945 Eddyono, Luthfi Widagdo
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 14, No 1 (2017)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (491.017 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1414

Abstract

Perubahan UUD 1945 yang dilakukan pada tahun 1999-2002 salah satunya bermaksud untuk memperkuat peran dan kedudukan partai politik dalam sistem ketatanegaraan Indonesia. Sebelum perubahan UUD 1945, frasa “partai politik” tersebut sama sekali tidak ada dalam naskah UUD 1945. Penguatan kedudukan partai politik tersebut terlihat pada Pasal 6A dan Pasal 8 UUD 1945 yang terkait dengan pengusulan pasangan calon presiden dan wakil presiden dan pemberian kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi untuk memutus pembubaran partai politik (Pasal 24C UUD 1945), termasuk kedudukan partai politik sebagai peserta pemilihan umum anggota DPR dan DPRD (Pasal 22E UUD 1945). Secara kumulatif, frasa “partai politik” hanya enam kali disebutkan dalam UUD 1945. Walaupun demikian, berdasarkan original intent, sangat terasa upaya untuk memperkuat peran strategis partai politik sebagai sarana penunjang demokrasi konstitusional yang diupayakan terkonsolidasi secara berkesinambungan.Tulisan ini dimaksudkan untuk mengkaji original intent perubahan UUD 1945 terkait dengan peran dan kedudukan partai politik dalam sistem ketatanegaraan Indonesia, termasuk dengan kebutuhan adanya desentralisasi partai politik di Indonesia. Hasilnya adalah jika dikaitkan dengan desentralisasi peran dan tanggung jawab partai politik di tingkat pusat kepada partai politik di tingkat daerah, tidak terdapat original intent yang terkait dengan hal tersebut, akan tetapi jika dikaitkan dengan Pasal 18 UUD 1945 yang berkenaan dengan Pemerintahan Daerah, maka pemaknaan sistematis UUD 1945 tentu saja meliputi desentralisasi peran partai politik tersebut. Apalagi berdasarkan ketentuan normatif konstitusi, partai politik juga mempunyai kewenangan untuk mencalonkan anggota dewan perwakilan rakyat daerah. Oleh karena itu, pengaturan mengenai desentralisasi peran dan tanggung jawab partai politik perlu dinormakan dalam format Undang-Undang agar moralitas konstitusional desentralisasi hubungan pusat dan pemerintahan daerah dapat terjadi dan terkonsolidasi dengan baik. Dengan demikian, partai politik diharapkan mampu menjalankan perannya sebagai sarana komunikasi politik, sosialisasi politik (political socialization), pengatur konflik (conflict management) dan akhirnya menjadi sarana rekruitmen politik (political recruitment) baik di tingkat pusat maupun di tingkat daerah.Amendment to the 1945 Constitution which was conducted in 1999-2002 intends to strengthen the role and position of political parties in the Indonesian state administration system. Before the change of the 1945 Constitution, the phrase “political party” was completely absent in the text of the 1945 Constitution. The strengthening of the political party’s position was seen in Article 6A and Article 8 of the 1945 Constitution related to the nomination of the pair of presidential and vice presidential candidates and the authority of the Constitutional Court to decide upon the dissolution of political parties (Article 24C of the 1945 Constitution), including the status of political parties as participants in the general election of members of the DPR and DPRD (Article 22E of the 1945 Constitution). Cumulatively, the phrase “political party” is only mentioned six times in the 1945 Constitution. However, based on the original intent, it is felt the efforts to strengthen the strategic role of political parties as a supporting the consolidation of constitutional democracy.This paper is intended to examine the original intent of the 1945 Constitution about the role and position of political parties in the Indonesian state administration system, including the need for decentralization of political parties in Indonesia. The result is there is no original intent relating the decentralization of roles and responsibilities of political parties at the central level to political parties at the regional scale, but if associated with Article 18 of the 1945 Constitution with respect to local Government, the systematic The 1945 Constitution, of course, covers the decentralization of the role of the political party. Moreover, based on the normative provisions of the law, political parties also have the authority to nominate members of the regional legislature. Therefore, the regulation on the decentralization of the roles and responsibilities of political parties should be formalized in the Law so that constitutional morality of the decentralized central and local government relations can occur and be consolidated well. Thus, political parties are expected to play their role as a means of political communication, political socialization, conflict management and eventually become a means of executive recruitment both at the central and regional levels.
The Constitutional Court and Consolidation of Democracy in Indonesia Eddyono, Luthfi Widagdo
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 15, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (648.997 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1511

Abstract

The amendment of 1945 Constitution was stipulated and conducted gradually and became one of the agendas of the Meetings of the People’s Consultative Assembly (Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat) from 1999 until 2002. It happened after the resignation of President Soeharto on May 21, 1998, that already in power for almost 32 years. In the reform era, Indonesia has taken comprehensive reform measures by bringing the sovereignty back to the hand of the people. To safeguard the supremacy of the 1945 Constitution, the Constitutional Court of Indonesia is formed as one of the judiciary authority organizing court proceedings to enforce the law and justice. This article analyzes the consolidation of democracy in Indonesia, the role of Constitutional Court of Indonesia based on its authority and describe how its decision has significant support for consolidation of democracy in Indonesia. The result of the research then shows that the Constitutional Court has made a positive influence in Indonesian consolidation of democracy. The Constitutional Court is also handy for upholding the constitutional norm, especially about state institutions and human rights. The Constitutional Court has taken an essential role in the consolidation of democracy in Indonesia through its decisions in judicial review of acts and resolving election disputes.
Konstitusionalitas Hak Perguruan Tinggi untuk Mengelola Kekayaan Negara Eddyono, Luthfi Widagdo
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 15, No 2 (2018)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (522.226 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1529

Abstract

Pada 12 Desember 2013, Mahkamah Konstitusi telah memutuskan perkara 103/PUU-X/2012. Perkara tersebut diajukan oleh para mahasiswa hukum dari Universitas Andalas yang pada pokoknya mempersoalkan salah satunya terkait dengan konstitusionalitas hak pengelolaan kekayaan negara kepada perguruan tinggi yang sejatinya memang rentan untuk disalahgunakan. Tulisan ini akan mengkaji putusan tersebut, serta putusan atas isu-isu lainnya untuk melihat keterkaitan satu sama lain seperti mengenai konstitusionalitas penyelenggaraan perguruan tinggi negeri badan hukum. Tulisan ini juga mengaitkan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tersebut dengan putusan-putusan sebelumnya secara komprehensif. Pada akhirnya, Mahkamah Konstitusi telah menyatakan penyerahan hak pengelolaan kekayaan negara kepada perguruan tinggi adalah konstitusional, selama kepemilikan atas kekayaan negara tersebut tidak dialihkan dan pelaksanaannya dilakukan sesuai dengan persyaratan yang ditentukan oleh pemerintah. Walau demikian, fakta yang terungkap dalam persidangan, pemerintah justru telah memberi “fleksibilitas” dalam tata kelola dan manajemen keuangan perguruan tinggi, baik dalam pengalokasian maupun dalam penggunaan dana baik yang bersumber dari APBN maupun dari sumber-sumber pendanaan lainnya yang tentu saja rentan untuk disalahgunakan, sehingga penulis merekomendasikan urgensinya pengaturan tata kelola perguruan tinggi agar terhindar dari penyalahgunaan pengelolaan dan termasuk pencegahan atas tindakan koruptif.On December 12, 2013, the Constitutional Court has ruled the case 103/PUU-X/2012. The case was filed by law students from the University of Andalas who questioned related to the constitutionality of the right of the management of state assets handled by universities that are actually vulnerable to misuse. This paper will examine the decision, as well as the decision on other issues to see the interrelationship of each other such as the constitutionality of the organization of state universities legal entities. This paper also links the Decision with previous decisions in a comprehensive description. Ultimately, the Constitutional Court has declared that the transfer of state property rights to universities is constitutional, as long as the ownership of the state’s property is not transferred and its execution is carried out in accordance with the requirements stipulated by the government. Nevertheless, the facts revealed in the trial even the government has given “flexibility” in the management and financial management of universities, both in the allocation and in the use of funds either sourced from the state budget or from other sources of funding which of course vulnerable to abuse. That is why the author recommend the urgency of governance regulations of universities to avoid misuse of management and including the prevention of corrupt acts.
Progresivitas Putusan Sengketa Kewenangan Lembaga Negara dan Pembaharuan Hukum Acara Eddyono, Luthfi Widagdo
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 16, No 1 (2019)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (427.179 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1617

Abstract

Berdasarkan Pasal 24C ayat (1) UUD 1945, salah satu kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi adalah memutus sengketa kewenangan lembaga negara yang kewenangannya diberikan oleh UUD 1945. Untuk mengatur hal-hal lebih lanjut, dibentuklah Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Akan tetapi, undang-undang tersebut masih belum menjelaskan detail hukum acara kewenangan tersebut, sehingga Mahkamah Konstitusi diberikan kewenangan untuk mengatur hal-hal yang diperlukan bagi kelancaran pelaksanaan tugas dan wewenangnya. Karenanya Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 08/PMK/2006 tentang Pedoman Beracara dalam Sengketa Kewenangan Konstitusional Lembaga Negara bertanggal, 18 Juli 2006 dibuat oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi. Akan tetapi, Peraturan itu belum juga diubah sampai sekarang padahal berbagai putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi sedikit banyak telah menentukan beberapa hal yang terkait dengan hukum formal di Mahkamah Konstitusi. Bahkan setelah adanya Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2011 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi, Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi juga belum direvisi. Tulisan ini akan memfokuskan pada analisis terhadap hukum acara perkara sengketa kewenangan lembaga negara oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi pasca beberapa putusan yang telah dihasilkan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dan adanya Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2011 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Rekomendasi yang dihasilkan terkait dengan kebutuhan revisi hukum acara Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagaimana termaktub dalam Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi seperti perlunya diatur keberadaan pihak terkait karena sengketa tersebut pada dasarnya adalah perselisihan atau perbedaan pendapat yang berkaitan dengan pelaksanaan kewenangan antara dua atau lebih lembaga negara, sehingga sengketa kewenangan lembaga negara masih memungkinkan adanya pihak terkait.Based on Article 24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, one of the authorities of the Constitutional Court is to decide on the authority dispute of state institutions whose authority is granted by the 1945 Constitution. To regulate further matters, Law Number 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court was established. However, the law still does not explain the details of the procedural law of the authority, so the Constitutional Court is given the power to regulate matters needed for the smooth implementation of its duties and authorities. Therefore the Constitutional Court Regulation Number 08/PMK/2006 concerning Procedure Guidelines in the Constitutional Institutional Authority Dispute dated July 18, 2006, was made by the Constitutional Court. However, the regulation has not been changed until now even though various Constitutional Court decisions have determined the number of things related to formal law in the Constitutional Court. Even after the Law Number 8 of 2011 concerning Amendments to Law Number 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court, the Constitutional Court Regulation has also not been revised. This paper will focus on the analysis of the procedural law on state authority dispute cases by the Constitutional Court after several decisions that have been produced by the Constitutional Court and the existence of Law Number 8 of 2011 concerning Amendments to Law Number 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court. There are recommendations that are generated related to the need for revisions to the Constitutional Court procedural law as set out in the Constitutional Court Regulations such as the need to regulate the existence of related parties because the dispute is basically a dispute or difference of opinion relating to the implementation of authority between two or more state institutions.
Quo Vadis Pancasila sebagai Norma Konstitusi yang Tidak Dapat Diubah Eddyono, Luthfi Widagdo
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 16, No 3 (2019)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik 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.  
Penyelesaian Sengketa Kewenangan Lembaga Negara oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi Luthfi Widagdo Eddyono
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 7, No 3 (2010)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (906.658 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk731

Abstract

This article is about settlement disputes of authorities of state institutions by the Constitutional Court of Indonesia. Pursuant to Article 24C Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution in conjunction with Article 10 Paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court Law, the Constitutional Court of Indonesia has the authority to hear at the first and final level, the decision of which shall be final, among others in deciding disputes of authorities of state institutions, the authorities of which are granted by  the Constitution. But, the 1945 Constitution and the Constitutional Court Law not provide enough rules for the Constitutional Court to decide the case, especially about objectum litis and subjectum litis.In the Decision Number 004/SKLNIV/2006  dated  July  12,  2006  the Constitutional Court using gramatical interpretation (grammatische interpretatie) and declare that to decide upon disputes on authority granted by 1945 Constitution, the first thing to consider is the existence  of certain authorities in the Constitution and then to which institutions those authorities are given. Constitutional authority not just textually specified in the 1945 Constitution, but also implicit authority derived from the principal authority, and necessary and proper authority to exercise the principal authority.Related to that, classification of state institutions can be based on the form of power/authority given to the state institution.
Co-Authors