., Fathudin
Center For Constitutional And National Legislation Studies Ii(Posko-Legnas) Faculty Of Sharia And Law Of UIN Jakarta

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

KEWENANGAN PENGUJIAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN (Analisis Perbandingan Antara Negara Indonesia Dengan Negara Prancis) Fathudin Fathudin; Annisa Hidayatush Sholikha; Ismail Hasani
JOURNAL of LEGAL RESEARCH Vol 4, No 1 (2022)
Publisher : Faculty of Sharia and Law State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15408/jlr.v4i1.21092

Abstract

This study describes comparison problems of Judicial Reviews in Indonesia and France. Which is where in the comparison, there is an equation and Judicial Review of the Prevailing Laws. This study aims to determine the development of the Judicial Review in Indonesia and French. In particular, this thesis explores a method of Judicial Review between Indonesia and France. The results show that, in Indonesia, there are two institutions that carry out Judicial Review, namely the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. This is the basis for the comparison of Judicial Review with the French state, which in the French state is only carried out with one institution, namely the Constitutional Council. In general, the practice of Constitutionality contains various aspects such as institutional aspects, procedures and the nature of the decision. In the institutional context, a special institutionalization model is to form an institution such as the Constitutional Court in Indonesia. Then a model of testing by establishing a new body specifically but having a political character and not a judicial body was found in France with the Conseil Constitutionnel. The existence of a Constitutionality Review agency has implications for the procedural aspects and forms of testing it.
Existence of Clemency as President Prerogative Right (Comparison Study of Indonesia with Countries of the World) Fathudin .; Ahmad Tholabi Kharlie
Jurnal Cita Hukum Vol 5, No 1 (2017)
Publisher : Fakultas Syariah dan Hukum, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15408/jch.v5i1.6574

Abstract

The debate about the existence of clemency as a prerogative of the president stems from the understanding that the rights is coming independently from the authority and without any branches of power. In this context, the comparative study of the constitutional norms in some countries in the world related to the norm of clemency is important to read the tendency of other countries about clemency rules. This study shows that the constitutional norm of countries in the world basically has the same tendency in the application of clemency by the president; there is involvement of other branches of power. Some constitutions of the world call the recommendation, hearing, information, consultation, advice, in accord, concurrence (approval) and others. The involvement of other branches of power in the grant of pardon does not mean reducing the authority of the president (prerogative), but it has become a tendency in almost all modern states to embrace the system of government power within the framework of public accountability. The term prerogative of the president (absolute) in practice is no longer absolute and independent. Perdebatan sepuar eksistensi grasi sebagai hak prerogatif presiden berpangkal pada pemahaman yang menyebut bahwa suatu hak disebut sebagai hak prerogatif presiden jika kewenangan yang lahir dari hak tersebut bersifat khusus dan  mandiri tanpa adanya keterlibatan cabang kekuasaan lain. Dalam konteks ini, kajian perbandingan terutama terhadap norma konstitusi di beberapa negara di dunia terkait dengan norma tentang grasi menjadi penting untuk memotret kecenderungan yang dimiliki negara-negara lain dalam hal pengaturan tentang grasi. Kajian ini menunjukan bahwa norma konstitusi negara-negara di dunia pada dasarnya memiliki kecenderungan yang sama dalam penerapan pemberian grasi oleh presiden, yakni ada keterlibatan cabang kekuasaan lain. Beberapa konstitusi negara-negara di dunia menyebut keterlibatan tersebut dengan menggunakan ragam istilah seperti recomandation, hearing, inform, consultation, advice, in accordance, conccurance (persetujuan) dan lain-lain. Adanya keterlibatan cabang kekuasaan lain dalam mekanisme pemberian grasi bukan berarti mereduksi kewenangan presiden (hak prerogatif), tetapi memang menjadi kecenderungan hampir di semua negara-negara modern untuk menganut sistem pemerintahan yang berusaha menempatkan segala model kekuasaannya dalam kerangka pertanggungjawaban publik, sehingga istilah hak prerogatif presiden (sacara mutlak) dalam prakteknya tidak lagi bersifat mutlak dan mandiri. DOI: 10.15408/jch.v5i1.6574
Tindak Pidana Korupsi (Dugaan Penyalahgunaan Wewenang) Pejabat Publik (Perspektif Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 Tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan) Fathudin .
Jurnal Cita Hukum Vol 3, No 1 (2015)
Publisher : Fakultas Syariah dan Hukum, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15408/jch.v2i1.1844

Abstract

Abstract: Allegation of abuse of authority that committed by public officials is an object to should be examined with the specialty principle (specialialiteit beginsel), because the deviation from this principle would impact  to abuse of authority (detournement de pouvoir). In this context, the allegation  of abuse of authority is a domain of administrative law (administrative penal law) so that the authority to examine the presence or absence of the element of abuse of authority is absolute competence of administrative  court. The application of this mechanism in line with the principle of ultimum remidiun in the application of criminal law. The application of a criminal sanction must be applied as a final sanction after the civil or administrative sanctions. In order to give opportunity for the public to give correction, corrections  (No Criminal Penalty before adminsitrative Correction is implemented). Government Administration Act is a response to the polemic of the object of dispute the allegation of abuse of authority that always be drawn directly into the realm of criminal law.   Keyword : abuse of authority, administrative law, administrative  court   Abstrak: Dugaan terjadinya penyalahgunaan wewenang yang dilakukan oleh pejabat pemerintahan merupakan objek yang harus diuji dengan asas spesialitas (specialialiteit beginsel), karena penyimpangan terhadap asas ini akan melahirkan penyalahgunaan wewenang (detournement de pouvoir). Pada konteks ini, maka dugaan penyalahgunaan wewenang merupakan domain hukum administrasi (administratif penal law ) sehingga wewenang untuk memeriksa ada atau tidak adanya unsur penyalahgunaan wewenang merupakan kompetensi absolut peradilam administrasi (Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara). Penerapan mekanisme ini selaras dengan asas ultimum remidiun dalam penerapan hukum pidana, di mana keberadaan pengaturan sanksi pidana harus diletakkan dan diposisikan sebagai sanksi terakhir setalah sanksi perdata maupun sanksi administratif tidak berdaya sebagai upaya memberikan ruang bagi masyarakat luas akan upaya perbaikan, koreksi, dan upaya lainnya sebelum pemidanaan diberikan (No Criminal Penalty before Adminsitrative Correction is implemented). Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan merupakan jawaban terhadap polemik seputar objek sengketa dugaan penyalahgunaan wewenang yang selama ini langsung ditarik ke ranah hukum pidana padahal sebuah kebijakan tidaklah dapat dikriminalisasi.  DOI: 10.15408/jch.v2i1.1844