Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Perspektif : Kajian Masalah Hukum dan Pembangunan
Misranto Misranto
Pusat Kajian Konstitusi Fakultas Hukum Universitas Merdeka Pasuruan Jln. Ir. H. Juanda 68 Pasuruan Telp. (0343) 413619, 421783 Fax. (0343) 420926 Pasuruan 67129
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

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

Found 4 Documents
Search

 1 
PENANGANAN SENGKETA TATA USAHA NEGARA (TUN) YANG TIDAK TERMASUK KEPUTUSAN TATA USAHA NEGARA (KTUN) OLEH PERADILAN UMUM (PU) SETELAH PENERAPAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 9 TAHUN 2004 TENTANG PTUN Misranto Misranto
Perspektif Vol 11, No 2 (2006): Edisi April
Publisher : Institute for Research and Community Services (LPPM) of Wijaya Kusuma Surabaya University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30742/perspektif.v11i2.395

Abstract

The conflict management of State Administration (TUN) does not include the decision of State Administration (KTUN) by General Court afer the implementation of the regulation number 9 by the year of 2004 could be understood through three points: first, the conflict of State Administration (TUN) which does not include the decision of State Administration (KTUN) becomes General Court’s competence; second, the conflict of State Administration (TUN) which is out of question becomes General Court’s competence; third, the conflict of the decision of State Administration which becomes State Administration Court’s competence. With those three points in mind, the problem solution should be searched from the aspects of doctrine and the aspects of decision. The aspects of doctrine would be analyzed to broaden the vision in decision making, while the aspects of decision would be the jurisprudence of the judges in decision making. Not every decision of State Administration becomes the State Administration Court’s competence. There would be some decisions of State Administration become the General Courts competence. To deal with it, the State Administration Court’s competence need to be broaden so the institution would become independent. Besides, there would be some unsuitable understanding form the law so the confirmation of the understanding would be necessary.
MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM KONSTRUKSI SISTEM PERADILAN IMPEACHMENT Misranto Misranto
Perspektif Vol 19, No 3 (2014): Edisi September
Publisher : Institute for Research and Community Services (LPPM) of Wijaya Kusuma Surabaya University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (1128.27 KB) | DOI: 10.30742/perspektif.v19i3.18

Abstract

Mahkamah Konstitusi merupakan institusi peradilan yang dipercaya oleh konstitusi (UUD 1945) untuk mengimplementasikan sistem peradilan impeachment. Peradilan impeachment dimulai dengan permintaan fatwa oleh Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat kepada Mahkamah Konstitusi. Kedudukan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat dalam persidangan Mahkamah Konstitusi atau dalam sistem peradilan impeachment adalah sebagai pihak pemohon. Permohonan diajukan ke Mahkamah Konstitusi setelah Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat berpendapat bahwa Presiden dan/atau Wakil Presiden telah melakukan pelanggaran yang disebutkan dalam Pasal 7A UUD 1945. Sedangkan putusan yang diberikan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi menjadi bukti, bahwa Indonesia benar-benar sebagai negara yang berbentuk negara hukum. Kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam sistem peradilan impeachment baru bisa dijalankan, bilamana Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat mengajukan permohonan padanya. Kalau Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat tidak mengajukannya, maka sistem peradilan impeachment tidak akan terwujud.The Constitutional Court is a judicial institution that is trusted by the constitution (UUD 1945) to implement the impeachment court sistem. Justice impeachment begins with a request fatwa by the House of Representatives to the Constitutional Court. Position of the House of Representatives at the hearing of the Constitutional Court or the judicial sistem of impeachment is the applicant. Application is submitted to the Constitutional Court after the House of Representatives argued that the President and/or Vice-President has committed an offense referred to in Article 7A of the 1945 Constitution. While the verdict given by the Constitutional Court is proof that Indonesia is really a form of state law countries. Authority of the Constitutional Court in the impeachment court sistem can only be executed, if the House of Representatives to apply to him. If Parliament does not propose, then the justice sistem impeachment will not be realized.
KEDUDUKAN HUKUM KARYAWAN BANK PASCA DILAKUKAN MERGER, KONSOLIDASI DAN AKUISISI Misranto Misranto
Perspektif Vol 12, No 2 (2007): Edisi Mei
Publisher : Institute for Research and Community Services (LPPM) of Wijaya Kusuma Surabaya University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30742/perspektif.v12i2.382

Abstract

One of the terms of economic crisis in Indonesia is monetary crisis. Monetary crisis or economic up to now still occur in Indonesia, which is noted by banks which undergo liquidity that causes the banks “willing or not, wanting or not” have to throw away its stirring and shake hands with the other banks to build cooperation or to look for strategic partner in order to survive by doing merger consolidation, and bank acquisition. However, the member of merger banks should notice the effects of law appeared due to merger consolidating, and that acquisition, in addition to its bank employees, because the employees have the full control as the bank operational. Bank is impossible having its activity well without full supports of its employees.
MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM KONSTRUKSI SISTEM PERADILAN IMPEACHMENT Misranto Misranto
Perspektif Vol. 19 No. 3 (2014): Edisi September
Publisher : Institute for Research and Community Services (LPPM) of Wijaya Kusuma Surabaya University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30742/perspektif.v19i3.18

Abstract

Mahkamah Konstitusi merupakan institusi peradilan yang dipercaya oleh konstitusi (UUD 1945) untuk mengimplementasikan sistem peradilan impeachment. Peradilan impeachment dimulai dengan permintaan fatwa oleh Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat kepada Mahkamah Konstitusi. Kedudukan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat dalam persidangan Mahkamah Konstitusi atau dalam sistem peradilan impeachment adalah sebagai pihak pemohon. Permohonan diajukan ke Mahkamah Konstitusi setelah Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat berpendapat bahwa Presiden dan/atau Wakil Presiden telah melakukan pelanggaran yang disebutkan dalam Pasal 7A UUD 1945. Sedangkan putusan yang diberikan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi menjadi bukti, bahwa Indonesia benar-benar sebagai negara yang berbentuk negara hukum. Kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam sistem peradilan impeachment baru bisa dijalankan, bilamana Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat mengajukan permohonan padanya. Kalau Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat tidak mengajukannya, maka sistem peradilan impeachment tidak akan terwujud.The Constitutional Court is a judicial institution that is trusted by the constitution (UUD 1945) to implement the impeachment court sistem. Justice impeachment begins with a request fatwa by the House of Representatives to the Constitutional Court. Position of the House of Representatives at the hearing of the Constitutional Court or the judicial sistem of impeachment is the applicant. Application is submitted to the Constitutional Court after the House of Representatives argued that the President and/or Vice-President has committed an offense referred to in Article 7A of the 1945 Constitution. While the verdict given by the Constitutional Court is proof that Indonesia is really a form of state law countries. Authority of the Constitutional Court in the impeachment court sistem can only be executed, if the House of Representatives to apply to him. If Parliament does not propose, then the justice sistem impeachment will not be realized.
Co-Authors