Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan
MD, Moh Mahfud
Unknown Affiliation
Economics, Econometrics & Finance Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
ASPEK HUKUM NEGARA DAN ADMINISTRASI NEGARA KELEMBAGAAN PENGADILAN PAJAK MD, Moh Mahfud
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 4 No 3 (2015)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.4.3.2015.351-360

Abstract

Pengadilan Pajak merupakan pengadilan pajak murni (administratief rechtspraak) yang memenuhi unsur-unsur sebagai lembaga peradilan, bukan pengadilan internal administrasi murni (administratif beroep) di bidang perpajakan. Pengadilan pajak merupakan pengadilan khusus dalam lingkungan peradilan tata usaha negara di Mahkamah Agung.7 Dengan demikian secara kelembagaan Pengadilan Pajak berkedudukan sebagai bagian dari Mahkamah Agung sebagai pelaku kekuasaan kehakiman sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 24 Ayat (2) UUD 1945.
TITIK SINGGUNG WEWENANG ANTARA MA DAN MK MD, Moh Mahfud
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 4 No 1 (2015)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.4.1.2015.1-16

Abstract

The existence of the Constitutional Court (MK) in Indonesia is linked to the Supreme Court (MA) both in the universal philosophy and in history and the particular debate. Being natural in practice found several points of authority tangency which must be resolved not only academically but in juridiction. If powers of the Constitutional Court was elaborated and then linked with the authority of the Supreme Court the authority then it appears there is a cross between the two institutions. The Constitutional Court judge rules conflict which is abstract at once judges conflicts (disputes) between the person or institution that is concrete. There is also the Supreme Court also adjudicates conflicts (disputes) between people or institution that is concrete as well adjudicates conflicts between rules which are abstract. Here appears the cross testing authority in legislation between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court because they both have the authority to conduct testing, but to different degrees.Keywords: Connective Point, Supreme Court, Constitutional Court
Co-Authors