<![CDATA[Zamzabila Abdillah Syakur, Indah Dwi Qurbani, Ria Casmi Arrsa Fakultas Hukum Universitas Brawijaya Jl. MT. Haryono No. 169 Malang e-mail: azamzamzabila@gmail.com Abstrak Terdapat dugaan tindakan pembangkangan konstitusi (constitutional disobedience) yang dilakukan oleh Presiden dan DPR terhadap Pasal 22 UUD NRI 1945 dan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 melalui penetapan Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2022 tentang Cipta Kerja (Perppu Cipta Kerja), yaitu terkait penambahan partisipasi masyarakat yang bermakna (meaningful participation), pemenuhan kriteria kegentingan yang memaksa, serta penetapan oleh DPR yang tidak sesuai ketentuan konstitusi. Berdasarkan permasalahan tersebut, penelitian ini mengangkat rumusan masalah yaitu: (1) Apakah penetapan Perppu Cipta Kerja memenuhi kriteria tindakan constitutional disobedience yang mengimplikasi tanggung jawab Presiden dan DPR? (2) Bagaimana bentuk tanggung jawab yang harus dilakukan oleh Presiden dan DPR terkait dengan tindakan constitutional disobedience dalam penetapan Perppu Cipta Kerja? Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini yaitu metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konseptual. Bahan hukum yang diperoleh dianalisis dengan teknik interpretasi dan interpretasi sistematis. Hasil dari penelitian menunjukkan bahwa penetapan Perppu Cipta Kerja tidak memenuhi unsur meaningful participation sebagaimana diamanatkan putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020, tidak memenuhi unsur kegentingan yang memaksa sebagai kriteria penetapan perppu, serta tidak disetujui pada masa sidang berikut oleh DPR sebagaimana ketentuan Pasal 22 UUD NRI 1945. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, Presiden dan DPR harus melakukan pertanggungjawaban atas dampak dari pembangkangan yang telah dilakukan dengan melakukan pencabutan Perppu Cipta Kerja melalui mekanisme legislative review atau executive review. Kata Kunci: tanggung jawab, constitutional disobedience, Perppu Cipta Kerja Abstract There has been allegedly constitutional disobedience by the President and the DPR (The House of Representatives) against Article 22 of the 1945 Constitution of Indonesia and Constitutional Court Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 concerning Job Creation (Government Regulation in Lieu of Law concerning Job Creation), specifically regarding the addition of meaningful participation, the fulfillment of forcing critical situation criteria, and the stipulation by the DPR contravening the provision of the constitution. Departing from this problem, this research aims to investigate (1) whether the stipulation of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law concerning Job Creation meets the criteria of the conduct of constitutional disobedience that implies the responsibility of the President and the DPR and (2) what responsibility is held by the President and the DPR following the constitutional disobedience in the stipulation of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law concerning Job Creation. This research employed normative-juridical methods and statutory and conceptual approaches. All the legal materials were analyzed using systematic interpretation. The research results reveal that the stipulation of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law fails to fulfill the principle of meaningful participation as mandated by the Decision of Constitutional Court Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020, fails to fulfill the aspect of forcing critical situation criteria as the basis of the stipulation of the Government Regulation concerned, and disapproval given at the session by the DPR as in the provision of Article 22 of the 1945 Constitution. Thus, both the President and the DPR are held responsible for the effects of the disobedience, requiring the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law concerning Job Creation to be scrapped under the legislative review or executive review mechanisms. Keywords: responsibility, constitutional disobedience, Government Regulation in Lieu of Law concerning Job Creation]]>
Copyrights © 2023
