Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Inkonsistensi Putusan Peradilan Dan Kepastian Hukum Dalam Pemilihan Kepala Daerah Di Indonesia BRYAN LUCKY LUCIANO; GIOVANNI YONATHAN; HESTI ARMIWULAN; ERLY ARISTO
Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis Vol 6 No 10 (2025): Tema Filsafat, Politik dan Etika Profesi Hukum
Publisher : Himpunan Ilmu Hukum dan Ilmu Hukum Islam

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56370/jhlg.v6i10.3306

Abstract

The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia establishes a state based on the rule of law, mandating strict legal certainty under Article 28D. However, the administration of the Regional Head Elections revealed a critical systemic vulnerability characterized by conflicting judicial interpretations regarding candidate eligibility between the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. This study aims to analyze the systemic legal uncertainty generated by Supreme Court Decision No. 23/P/HUM/2024, which retroactively altered the gubernatorial age benchmark to the time of inauguration and to comprehensively examine the remedial role of Constitutional Court Decision No. 70/PUU-XXII/2024. Employing a normative juridical research design, this study utilizes a statutory approach to analyze the hierarchy of electoral norms alongside a conceptual approach to dissect the jurisprudential coherence of both decisions against the doctrine of Lex Certa and Open Legal Policy. The research demonstrates that the Supreme Court's expansive interpretation created a severe "Validation Paradox," rendering candidacy eligibility conditional on variable administrative scheduling rather than fixed statutory criteria. By isolating temporal indeterminacy as a unique threat, this study distinguishes itself from general structural critiques, concluding that the Constitutional Court's restoration of the initial registration benchmark was a constitutional imperative to preserve the logical sequence of the democratic process.
The Elevation of Building Rights to Ownership Rights in Shophouses and Home Offices After the Enactment of Law Number 11 of 2020 Concerning Job Creation Erly Aristo; Nathania Putri Pangestu; Kristian Pranata
JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW Vol. 7 No. 1 (2024): APRIL
Publisher : Universitas Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.26623/julr.v7i1.8108

Abstract

This research aims to analyze the regulations regarding the elevation of land rights for dual-function residential buildings, specifically shophouses, as stipulated in Government Regulation Number 18 of 2021. The formulated problem statement is about the elevation of building rights for shophouses according to Government Regulation Number 18 of 2021. Beforehand, shophouses and home offices were only classified as buildings with a business function; the building Use rights on shophouses and home offices could not be upgraded to ownership rights. Based on the Decree of the State Minister of Agrarian Affairs/Head of the National Land Agency Number 6 of 1998, it is necessary to upgrade building use rights to ownership rights of buildings with residential functions only, as stated on the Building Construction Permit. This research was conducted using a normative juridical method through a statutory approach and a conceptual approach to see the existing arrangements regarding the issues raised and expert opinions related to these problems. The result of this research is that shophouses and office residences play a dual role, serving both residential and commercial functions. Government Regulation No. 18 of 2021 emphasizes that shophouses and office residences with building rights can be upgraded to full ownership rights upon the rights holder's request by fulfilling the specified requirements.