Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

AMBIGUITAS PENGATURAN KEADAAN BAHAYA DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN INDONESIA: ANALISIS CHECKS AND BALANCES KEWENANGAN PRESIDEN PASCA AMANDEMEN UUD 1945 Ismarini Della Purnama; Novaranty Zura Dwiputri; Anis Fauzan; Wicipto Setiadi
Dinamika Hukum & Masyarakat Vol. 8 No. 2 (2025): DINAMIKA HUKUM DAN MASYARAKAT
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Kadiri

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30737/dhm.v8i2.7252

Abstract

ABSTRAKSIPenelitian ini mengkaji ambiguitas pengaturan keadaan bahaya dalam sistemketatanegaraan Indonesia pasca-amandemen UUD 1945. Pasal 12 UUD 1945memberi Presiden kewenangan menyatakan keadaan bahaya, namun tidak merincidefinisi, kriteria, maupun mekanisme checks and balances terkait. Undang-UndangNomor 23 Tahun 1959 sebagai aturan pelaksana dianggap usang karena lahir dalamrezim politik sentralistik era Demokrasi Terpimpin. Penelitian ini menggunakanPendekatan normatif dan komparatif untuk menganalisis efektivitas pengawasanDPR atas kewenangan eksekutif dalam menetapkan keadaan bahaya. Hasilpenelitian menunjukkan peran DPR yang minim dan ketiadaan pembaruan regulasi,sehingga muncul celah hukum berpotensi memicu penyalahgunaan kekuasaan.Selain itu, terdapat tumpang tindih konsep antara “keadaan bahaya” dan“kegentingan yang memaksa” dalam praktik ketatanegaraan. Penelitian inimendorong rekomendasi rekonstruksi kerangka hukum keadaan bahaya yang lebihdemokratis, akuntabel, dan menjamin perlindungan hak asasi manusia sesuaiprinsip negara hukumKata Kunci : Keadaan Bahaya; Kewenangan Presiden; Checks andBalances; Sistem Ketatanegaraan Indonesia.
Comparison of the Indonesian Military Legal System with the Malaysian Military Legal System Anis Fauzan; Walidul Halim; Irwan Triadi
Journal of Law Perspectives Review Vol. 2 No. 1 (2026): Januari
Publisher : Catalist Indo Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.64670/jlpr.v2i1.69

Abstract

This study addresses the problem of how differences in legal traditions influence the structure and enforcement of military law in Indonesia and Malaysia. It aims to examine and compare the legal foundations, institutional structures of military courts, and the characteristics of law enforcement applied to members of the armed forces in both countries. The research employs a normative juridical method with a comparative law approach by analyzing statutory regulations, particularly Law Number 31 of 1997 on Military Courts in Indonesia and the Armed Forces Act 1972 (Act 77) in Malaysia, as well as relevant legal literature and doctrines. The findings reveal that the principal differences between the two systems derive from their respective legal traditions—Civil Law in Indonesia and Common Law in Malaysia—which shape the organization of military courts, jurisdictional design, and procedural mechanisms for adjudicating military offenses. Indonesia relies on a codified and hierarchical military judicial structure, whereas Malaysia integrates common law principles within its court-martial system. Nevertheless, both systems share a fundamental objective, namely maintaining discipline, hierarchy, and command effectiveness within military institutions. In conclusion, despite structural and procedural distinctions, the military legal systems of Indonesia and Malaysia pursue similar normative goals. This study contributes to the development of comparative military law and offers a reference for strengthening military legal reform in Indonesia in alignment with the principles of the rule of law, military professionalism, and legal supremacy.