Jurnal Hukum Adigama
Vol 3, No 2 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Adigama

POLEMIK KEWENANGAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI MENGUJI PERATURAN YANG MENGATUR EKSISTENSINYA

Brandon David (Unknown)
Diva Anastasya Suharto (Unknown)
Leslie Kwek (Unknown)



Article Info

Publish Date
12 Jan 2021

Abstract

Constitutional Court’s authority as a state institution that was created through the fourth amendment of the 1945 Constitution is mandated in paragraph 24C of  1945. Contitution essencially, Constutional Court’s has been given a role as a patron of constitution. Since Constitutional Court’s is the only one that has authority to review law to the state institution.Constituional Court’s has various functions, including performing constitutional review, where it ensures that legislation complies with the Constitution, including the human rights provisions, and can invalidate legislative provisions that it finds to be unconstitutional.Under this authority, everyone is allowed to bring unconstitutional statutes before the Constitutional Court’s. Accordingly the Controversy regarding the constitutional Court’s authority arises to do a review of Constution in Constitutional Court’s. The Controversy is based on contradiction between to formal legal principles, which the two are binding. This article then concludes with an analysis of the controversy on constitutional Court’s authority issues that remain.

Copyrights © 2020






Journal Info

Abbrev

adigama

Publisher

Subject

Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Description

Jurnal Hukum Adigama merupakan diseminasi (penyebarluasan) hasil penelitian, analisis putusan maupun kajian ilmiah konseptual dari mahasiswa beserta dengan pembimbingnya (Corresponding Author) yang terbit 2 (dua) kali dalam setahun yaitu pada bulan Juli dan Desember. Jurnal Hukum Adigama mencakup ...