“PEMBANGKANGAN” TERHADAP PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI - Fajar Laksono Soeroso (Komisi Yudisial RI, 2013)
ABSTRAKMahkamah Konstitusi (MK) merupakan lembaga yang berwenang memutus Perselisihan Hasil Pemilu Kepala Daerah (PHPU Kada). Sifat Putusan MK final dan mengikat sehingga semua pihak wajib menaati dan melaksanakannya. Namun dalam faktanya, terdapat Putusan MK yang tidak ditaati dan dilaksanakan. Artinya, ada dugaan pembangkangan terhadap Putusan MK. Sehubungan dengan hal tersebut, tulisan ini hendak menjawab dugaan bahwa Putusan Nomor 153/G/2011/PTUNJKT merupakan bentuk pembangkangan terhadap Putusan MK Nomor 45/PHPU.D.VIII/2010. Hasil analisis menyatakan bahwa Putusan Nomor 153/G/2011/PTUN-JKT secara faktual merupakan bentuk pembangkangan terhadap Putusan MK. Implikasi pembangkangan tersebut meliputi 3 (tiga) hal, yaitu (1) mengacaukan sistem dan tatanan hukum mengingat tidak seharusnya MA melakukan penilaian terhadap Putusan MK, (2) menimbulkan kebuntuan hukum terkait pengangkatan Bupati dan Wakil Bupati Kabupaten Kotawaringin Barat, dan (3) membuka kembali ruang wacana mengenai adanya rivalitas MA dan MK. Kata kunci: Pemilukada, Putusan PTUN, Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi.ABSTRACTThe Constitutional Court has the authority to decide the Dispute of Regional Head Election (PHPU Kada). The final and binding nature of the Constitutional Court’s decision has ruled all the parties to comply with and implement. However, there are some of the decisions which are not adhered to and implemented. There is a notion of disobedience to the decision. This analysis would like to elaborate how the Decision Number 452 K/TUN/2012 factually defied against the Constitutional Court’s Decision Number 45/PHPU.D.VIII/2010. For the most part, this analysis resolves that the Decision Number 153/G/2011/PTUN-JKT is factually such a kind of disobedience to that of the Constitutional Court. The implications cover three points; first, the disruption of system and legal order since the Supreme Court should not assess the Constitutional Court’s decision; second, a legal deadlock for the appointment of Regent and Vice Regent of the region of Kobar; and third, the rivalry discourse between the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court may eventually resurface. Keywords: Head Regional Election, State Administrative Court’s Decision, Constitutional Court’s Decision.