Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Judicial Preview on the Bill on International Treaty Ratification Noor Sidharta; Sudarsono Sudarsono; I Nyoman Nurjaya; Bambang Sugiri
Constitutional Review Vol 3, No 1 (2017)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (317.075 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/consrev312

Abstract

This research is aimed to find and introduce a new idea on the state administration, which has implications on the international treaty ratification procedure followed by Indonesia and additional authorizations of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The judicial preview in this research is an international treaty examination procedure by the Constitutional Court before an international treaty is transformed into a law, i.e. such international treaty is a Bill. The judicial preview shall have different terms in each country, such as Review ex ante, abstract review, judicial review. This procedure is applied when an international treaty has not been validated as a country’s national law. The benefits of a judicial preview shall be a solution to connect an ambiguity between the state administrative law and international law. The judicial preview is also the inter-state institutions real check and balance on the international treaty. Out of benchmarking results of four countries following the monism doctrine, i.e. Russia, Germany, France, and Italty and two countries following the dualism doctrine, i.e. Hungary and Ecuador, several additional authorizations of the Constitutional Court shall be summarized, i.e. via the Amendment of 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and/or regulations via laws. If both manners are not possible, the Constitutional Court may apply the judicial preview as a state administrative practice. An international treaty draft, which has passed through the judicial preview, may not be submitted to the Constitutional Court to be performed a judicial review, unless 5 (five) year-period has passed since the bill is enacted as a law.
Selection of Methods of Proving the Inability of Debtors to Pay Debts and the Application of Prejudice Against Misuse of Insolvency Institutions in Insolvency Law in Indonesia Yonatan YONATAN; Bambang SUGIRI; Sukarmi SUKARMI; Faizin SULISTIO
International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Science Vol. 4 No. 2 (2023): International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Science (Mar
Publisher : Indonesia Strategic Sustainability

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.38142/ijesss.v4i2.524

Abstract

In determining the inability of the Debtor to pay his debts to the Creditor known 2 (two) methods, namely: First, the Insolvency Test; Second, the use of prejudice of not being able to pay debts (Presumption of Inability to Pay). The Indonesian state uses the prejudice method of not being able to pay debts (Presumption of Inability to Pay), so the terms of bankruptcy become very simple. This article discusses the use of methods to determine the inability of the Debtor to repay debts associated with the prejudice to abuse (presumption of abuse) of the insolvency institution. The research method used in this article is normative juridical research with a statutory approach, a comparison approach, and a conceptual approach. There are several research results, namely; First, the politics of Indonesian insolvency law is time to change from prioritizing debt repayment to prioritizing Business Reorganization as found in the United States.; Second, it is time for the Indonesian state to abandon the prejudiced method of not being able to pay debts (Presumption of Inability to Pay) to use the Insolvency Test method to determine the incompetence of debtors in repaying debts.