Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

Legal Transplant and the Model of Constitutional Court Decision Bisariyadi, Bisariyadi
PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 5, No 1 (2018): PADJADJARAN JURNAL ILMU HUKUM (JOURNAL OF LAW)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Padjadjaran University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (414.482 KB)

AbstractThe Indonesian Constitutional Court may, at times, uses concepts and models of laws from other countries. The transplantation of foreign laws can be organic or mechanic. The model of legal transplantation in the procedural law is an organic transplantation. The transplants can be problematic since it requires a compliance with the legal system in the recipient system. This article focuses on the practices of legal transplant by the Indonesian Constitutional Court in its procedural laws, especially in regards to their decisions. It mainly concerns on (i) the formulation of constitutional injuries criteria to give standing for parties to access before the Court; and (ii) the adoption of conditional (un)constitutionality decisions. It also discuss the source from which the Court find the similar practices and to what extend the Court made some adjustments in order to suits in its procedural law. The article also argue that legal transplant in procedural law may found adversities. In order to overcome these, the Court needs to made alteration to the foreign laws.AbstrakMahkamah Konstitusi kerap mencangkok konsep dan model hukum yang berlaku di berbagai negara untuk diadopsi dalam putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi, baik dalam arti pencangkokan yang bersifat organis maupun mekanis. Pencangkokan hukum dalam hukum acara termasuk dalam sifatnya yang organis. Model transplantasi ini bisa memicu pada ketidaksesuaian dalam penerapannya pada hukum acara pada sistem hukum yang akan mengadopsinya. Tulisan ini menitikberatkan pada praktik Mahkamah Konstitusi yang mencangkok model hukum asing untuk diterapkan dalam hukum acara terutama dalam perumusan model putusannya. Yang menjadi perhatian dalam tulisan ini adalah mengenai (i) penentuan kriteria kerugian konstitusional dalam kedudukan hukum pemohon (legal standing); dan (ii) jenis putusan (in)konstitusional bersyarat (conditionally (un)constitutional). Tulisan ini akan menyigi sumber inspirasi Mahkamah Konstitusi menemukan model tersebut serta sejauh mana pengembangan yang dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi. Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk membuktikan bahwa pencangkokan model hukum asing dalam hukum acara Mahkamah Konstitusi juga menemukan beberapa hambatan. Dalam rangka menghadapi hambatan tersebut, Mahkamah Konstitusi melakukan penyesuaian atas konsep hukum asing yang diadopsinya.DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v5n1.a1

Yudisialisasi Politik dan Sikap Menahan Diri: Peran Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Menguji Undang-Undang Bisariyadi, Bisariyadi
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 12, No 3 (2015)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

In a review of the constitutionality of law or policy, the Constitutional Court can take an aggressive approach or choose to take self-restraint. Theoretical justification on the Court to change or made policy derived from the judicialization of politics. Global phenomenon indicates the shift of policy-making authority towards the judiciary. Consequently, policy makers shows resistence. Such conditions forced the Court to use a number of strategies to reduce political tensions between state institutions while at the same time the Court still protect the rights of citizens. The Court uses self-restraint approach to examine policies which in realm of legislative or executive discretion. This approach is referred to by the Court as an “open(ed) legal policy”. This study elaborates on the actions carried out by the Indonesian Constitutional Court to test the constitutionality of law or policy, both in the application of the judicialization of politics nor in the judicial restraint approach. In reality, the Court uses both of these approaches on review the constitutionality of law and policy.

Komparasi Mekanisme Penyelesaian Sengketa Pemilu di Beberapa Negara Penganut Paham Demokrasi Konstitusional Bisariyadi, Bisariyadi; Triningsih, Anna; Rahmawaty H, Meyrinda; Harumdani W, Alia
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 9, No 3 (2012)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Every country in the world, moreover in every country which has implemented the way of life of democcratic and nation, presume that election is one of the important element as a marker of democracy of the country and also has a practical function of government political as a succession’s tool between the government parties and the oposition parties. In every democratic constitutional state, the election process has a purpose to embody will of the people into pattern of power without violence.The election process will not only be assessed by sticking to the existing legal framework but the laws, codes of conduct of the election and its implementation needs to be tested and adjusted if it is in accordance with its primary purpose or not without ignoring the rights of individuals or people. In the process of the general election, the election process does not always run smoothly. Various obstacles in the implementation of good elections that occurred both during and previous election, is a problem that certainly would have widely spread impact if not immediately resolved. The existence of problems in the election related to dissatisfaction of decision of the election or criminal violations and administrative which can influence the result of election is commonly known by electoral disputes. In order the election dispute does not disturb the constitutional system or system of government of a country or region, it requires an electoral dispute resolution mechanisms that effective and can give a fair decision to the parties.The main problem is how the benchmark of an electoral dispute resolution mechanisms that are effective? Because, if traced further and reflect on democracies country in the world, not all democracies country, especially the democracies country which basing on the supremacy of the constitution, has the same electoral dispute resolution mechanisms between one country to another country. This is very important, because by knowing the measure or the benchmark of the effectiveness of an electoral dispute resolution mechanisms, we can consider to choose which electoral dispute resolution mechanisms that appropriate and give the fairness to the parties and society in general.

Membedah Doktrin Kerugian Konstitusional Bisariyadi, Bisariyadi
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 14, No 1 (2017)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Penetapan ukuran kerugian konstitusional memiliki kedudukan strategis sebagai pintu gerbang atas pengujian norma yang hendak diuji. Mahkamah Konstitusi merumuskan syarat kerugian konstitusional berdasarkan penafsiran Pasal 51 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Doktrin kerugian konstitusional terdiri dari lima syarat yang dapat diklasifikasikan dalam dua kelompok. Kelompok pertama berisikan unsur-unsur yang harus dipenuhi pemohon terdiri dari (i) adanya hak dan/atau kewenangan konstitusional dan (ii) ada kerugian. Kelompok kedua merupakan prosedur pengujian mengenai ukuran kerugian yang diderita pemohon yang didalamnya yang terdiri dari (i) bentuk kerugian, (ii) hubungan kausalitas dan (iii) pemulihan kerugian. Kelima syarat ini bersifat kumulatif. Dalam penerapannya, doktrin kerugian konstitusional ini sangatlah dinamis. Ada kecenderungan bahwa doktrin ini menyimpan permasalahan. Tulisan ini berupaya mengidentifikasi masalah yang ada dalam penerapan doktrin kerugian konstitusional. Salah satunya adalah tumpang tindihnya antara pembuktian hak konstitusional pemohon dalam bagian kedudukan hukum dengan pengujian norma dalam pokok perkara. Sedangkan konkretisasi pembuktian unsur kerugian berkelindan dengan pengujiannya dalam kelompok doktrin kedua. Oleh karenanya, tulisan ini berkesimpulan bahwa telah ada kebutuhan untuk melakukan penyempurnaan doktrin kerugian konstitusional dengan melakukan penafsiran ulang atas Pasal 51 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Mahkamah Konstitusi dan tidak lagi mencantumkan kelompok pertama dalam doktrin kerugian konstitusional untuk pemeriksaan pengujian Undang-Undang di masa yang akan datang.The concept of constitutional injury is a substantial pre-requisite in the examination of judicial review case. The Constitutional Court drafted the concept as an interpretation of Article 51(1) of the Law on the Constitutional Court. It consists of five conditions that can be classified into two groups. The first group contains elements that must be met by the applicant which are (i) constitutional rights and/or authorities and (ii) injuries. The second group is the test in regard to the size of the injury suffered by the applicant therein consisting of (i) forms of injury, (ii) causality and (iii) redressability. The requirement is accumulative. Yet in practice the doctrine is variedly applied. There is tendency the doctrine itself causes problems. This paper seeks to identify the problems and aimed to give solution to the problem. Two problems are identified, one is an overlap examination of constitutional rights in standing and also in ratio decidendi. Another one is that the injury element in the doctrine intertwined with its own testing in the second group of the doctrine. Therefore, this paper concludes that there is a need to revise the doctrine with reinterpretation of Article 51 (1) of the Law and recommend not to exclude the first group of the doctrine.

Referencing International Human Rights Law In Indonesian Constitutional Adjudication Bisariyadi, Bisariyadi
Constitutional Review Vol 4, No 2 (2018)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

The power of the Indonesian Constitutional Court to review laws is a constitutional adjudication process. It is a forum to resolve constitutional issues where a citizen can challenge Law that has injured his rights. The Court's reasoning provides audiences with the debates for its deliberation. Audiences may find reference to the international human rights law. It is an interesting practice. However, there is no studies yet about the information on the statistic of the Court made reference to international human rights law. As such, this study aims to identify reference to international human rights law in the Court's decision on judicial review cases from 2003 to 2016. Additionally, this study also aims to answer the question of what underlies the Court to made reference to international human rights law. As many studies show, the objective of Constitutional Court's references to the international human rights law is to strengthen constitutional rights protection. Nonetheless, the Court did not pay any interests to the global agenda of transnational constitutionalism or a convergence of rights and legal pluralism. The article is divided into 5 (five) sections, commencing with the introduction. The second part discusses the status of international human rights law in Indonesia. As the third presents information on Court's decision which cited international human rights law. Then, the fourth presents typical function of the decision that made reference to international human rights law. It concluded that the practice of referring to international law demonstrates the open attitude of Indonesian constitutional justices to the universal nature of fundamental rights.

Constitutional Amendments: Making, Breaking and Changing Constitutions (2019). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 338 pages, ISBN 9780190640484 Bisariyadi, Bisariyadi
JILS (Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies) Vol 5 No 1 (2020): Globalization, Law, and Crimes: The Various Aspects of Law in Broader Context
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Negeri Semarang

When a constitutional judge willing to spend his time to give a review to a book, it is a great sign that the book has some appeals to offer. Yet, the book that is currently will be reviewed is not only discussed by one but two constitutional judges. At the end of November 2019, two constitutional judges, Saldi Isra and I Dewa Gede Palguna, discussed a book entitled â€œConstitutional Amendment: Making, Breaking and Changing Constitutionsâ€ written by Richard Albert. The attention to the book did not only appear in Indonesia. In the authorâ€™s origin, North America, the book received great acknowledgment from a wide range of legal and political scholars whom people often used to reference their works. Distinguished names like Bruce Ackerman, Tom Ginsburg, Ran Hirschl, Vicki Jackson and Mark Tushnet, encourage audiences to have a close examination of this recent Richard Albertâ€™s publication. Richard Albert, himself, is not a foreign name to political science communities, as well as constitutional law academics. Albert is one of the founders and editors of the International Journal of Constitutional Law (ICON). The book offers two distinct novelty as its strength. First, the book raised a very important issue in the constitutional discourse but rarely been discussed. the second strength of Albertâ€™s works is his mastery in capturing the constitutional amendment process in many countries around the globe and mapping them as well as structuring their similarities.

Constitutional Amendments: Making, Breaking and Changing Constitutions (2019). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 338 pages, ISBN 9780190640484 Bisariyadi, Bisariyadi
JILS (Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies) Vol 5 No 1 (2020): Globalization, Law, and Crimes: The Various Aspects of Law in Broader Context
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/jils.v5i1.37674

When a constitutional judge willing to spend his time to give a review to a book, it is a great sign that the book has some appeals to offer. Yet, the book that is currently will be reviewed is not only discussed by one but two constitutional judges. At the end of November 2019, two constitutional judges, Saldi Isra and I Dewa Gede Palguna, discussed a book entitled â€œConstitutional Amendment: Making, Breaking and Changing Constitutionsâ€ written by Richard Albert. The attention to the book did not only appear in Indonesia. In the authorâ€™s origin, North America, the book received great acknowledgment from a wide range of legal and political scholars whom people often used to reference their works. Distinguished names like Bruce Ackerman, Tom Ginsburg, Ran Hirschl, Vicki Jackson and Mark Tushnet, encourage audiences to have a close examination of this recent Richard Albertâ€™s publication. Richard Albert, himself, is not a foreign name to political science communities, as well as constitutional law academics. Albert is one of the founders and editors of the International Journal of Constitutional Law (ICON). The book offers two distinct novelty as its strength. First, the book raised a very important issue in the constitutional discourse but rarely been discussed. the second strength of Albertâ€™s works is his mastery in capturing the constitutional amendment process in many countries around the globe and mapping them as well as structuring their similarities.

Yudisialisasi Politik dan Sikap Menahan Diri: Peran Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Menguji Undang-Undang Bisariyadi, Bisariyadi
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 12, No 3 (2015)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

In a review of the constitutionality of law or policy, the Constitutional Court can take an aggressive approach or choose to take self-restraint. Theoretical justification on the Court to change or made policy derived from the judicialization of politics. Global phenomenon indicates the shift of policy-making authority towards the judiciary. Consequently, policy makers shows resistence. Such conditions forced the Court to use a number of strategies to reduce political tensions between state institutions while at the same time the Court still protect the rights of citizens. The Court uses self-restraint approach to examine policies which in realm of legislative or executive discretion. This approach is referred to by the Court as an â€œopen(ed) legal policyâ€. This study elaborates on the actions carried out by the Indonesian Constitutional Court to test the constitutionality of law or policy, both in the application of the judicialization of politics nor in the judicial restraint approach. In reality, the Court uses both of these approaches on review the constitutionality of law and Â policy.

Title

Found 8 Documents
Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title Search

Found 8 Documents Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title

Found 8 Documents
Search