Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

IMPLEMENTASI RECHTSVINDING YANG BERKARAKTERISTIK HUKUM PROGRESIF Hakim, Muh Ridha
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 5 No 2 (2016)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.5.2.2016.227-248

Abstract

The fundamental purpose of law is to create justice, legal certainty and utility. The contradiction between justice and legal certainty are dilemmatic for law enforcement officer. The legal certainty side is easier to be applied so that it neglect the justice itself. The law principle is unhierarchical, thus there is no superior principle which can ignore the other principle. The relevance of the application of legal principles is based on the situation in legal issues. Responding to these challenges appear paradigm of progressive law that the law is a scheme that is not final, it continues to move, to change, it follows the dynamics of human life. Therefore, the law is not seen as something that lives in a stagnation. Law is born from provision living in the society (ibi societas ibi ius). On that basis, the law must continue to be dissected and explored through progressive efforts to reach the ultimate truth for the sake of justice.Keywords : Rechtsvinding, Progressive Law
TAFSIR INDEPENDENSI KEKUASAAN KEHAKIMAN DALAM PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI / INTERPRETATION OF JUDICIAL POWER INDEPENDENCE IN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT DECISIONS Hakim, Muh Ridha
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 7 No 2 (2018)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.7.2.2018.279-296

Abstract

Artikel ini mengkaji mengenai independensi kekuasaan kehakiman yang ditinjau dari Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Independensi kekuasaan kehakiman merupakan keharusan dalam sebuah negara hukum (rechtstaat). Negara  hukum baik dalam konsep Rule of Law ataupun Rechtstaat, menempatkan peradilan yang bebas dan tidak  memihak  (independence and impartiality of judiciary) sebagai salah satu cirinya. Akan tetapi, kemerdekaan tersebut bukanlah tanpa batasan sehingga dapat diterjemahkan dengan seluas-luasnya. Sering kali dalam praktiknya independensi didalilkan untuk berlindung atas suatu perbuatan yang tidak dapat dipertanggungjawabkan. Oleh karenanya, perlu dilakukan penggalian makna independensi kekuasaan kehakiman sebagaimana amanat Pasal 24 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Dasar 1945. Pasal 24 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 menyatakan bahwa “kekuasaan kehakiman merupakan kekuasaan yang merdeka untuk menyelenggarakan peradilan guna menegakkan hukum dan keadilan”. Oleh karenanya, pertimbangan dari Mahkamah Konstitusi terkait putusan-putusan yang menjadikan Pasal 24 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 sebagai batu uji dalam pengujian undang-undang layak untuk dikaji dan diangkat menjadi tafsiran mengenai makna independensi kekuasaan kehakiman. Tulisan ini menggali pandangan hakim dalam putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang memuat pertimbangan mengenai independensi kekuasaan kehakiman. Penulisan menggunakan metode yuridis normatif melalui pendekatan konseptual (conceptual approach) dan pendekatan kasus (case approach). Tulisan ini menggunakan data sekunder dengan bahan hukum primernya adalah Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Data dianalisis menggunakan metode kualitatif.This article examines the independence of judiciary by reviewing the Constitutional Court Decisions. Independence of judiciary is an absolute fact in a state of law (rechtstaat). A state of law, in the concept of Rule of Law or Rechtstaat, lists independence and impartiality of judiciary as one of its characteristics. However,  independence is not as free as everybody can freely interpret the law. Often, in practice, independence is postulated so as to provide protection from an act that cannot be accounted for. Therefore, it is necessary to delve into the meaning of judicial power independency as mandated by Article 24 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. Article 24 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution states that “judicial power is an independent power to administer judicial proceedings to enforce the law and justice”. For that reason, it is reasonable that the Constitutional Court’s reasoning in relation to the decisions that render Article 24 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution a touchstone in the judicial review of the laws be investigated and regarded as an interpretation of the meaning of judicial power independence. This paper studies the views of the judges in the Constitutional Court decisions that contain the court’s reasoning regarding the judicial power independence. This paper was written by employing a juridical-normative method through a conceptual approach and a case approach. This paper uses secondary data with the Constitutional Court Decisions as the primary legal materials. The data were analyzed using a qualitative method.