Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

The Function of Judicial Dissent in Indonesiaâs Constitutional Court Butt, Simon
Constitutional Review Vol 4, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Indonesian judges are permitted to issue dissenting opinions. Constitutional Court judges regularly hand them down. However, neither judges nor academics have outlined the purposes of dissenting opinions in Indonesia. This article aims to promote discussion about what these purposes are, or should be, in Indonesia, with a view to increasing the utility of dissents. It begins by considering the international scholarly literature details some purposes recognised in other countries, such as increased transparency and accountability, but also some disadvantages, such as the perceived weakness of a divided court. It then considers how the Constitutional employs dissents, before exploring some of the uncertainties and unanswered questions about dissents and their use in Indonesia.

Filling the Hole in Indonesiaâs Constitutional System: Constitutional Courts and the Review of Regulations in a Split Jurisdiction Lindsey, Tim
Constitutional Review Vol 4, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

The Indonesian constitutional system contains a serious flaw that means that the constitutionality of a large number of laws cannot be determined by any court. Although the jurisdiction for the judicial review of laws is split between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court, neither can review the constitutionality of subordinate regulations. This is problematic because in Indonesia the real substance of statutes is often found in implementing regulations, of which there are very many. This paper argues that that is open to the Constitutional Court to reconsider its position on review of regulations in order to remedy this problem. It could do so by interpreting its power of judicial review of statutes to extend to laws below the level of statutes. The paper begins with a brief account of how Indonesia came to have a system of judicial constitutional review that is restricted to statutes. It then examines the experience of South Koreaâs Constitutional Court, a court in an Asian civil law country with a split jurisdiction for judicial review of laws like Indonesiaâs. Despite controversy, this court has been able to interpret its powers to constitutionally invalidate statutes in such a way as to extend them to subordinate regulations as well. This paper argues that Indonesiaâs Constitutional Court should follow South Koreaâs example, in order to prevent the possibility of constitutionalism being subverted by unconstitutional subordinate regulations.

Proportionality Test in the 1945 Constitution: Limiting Hizbut Tahrir Freedom of Assembly Taufik, Giri Ahmad
Constitutional Review Vol 4, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

In May 2017, Jokowiâs administration announced the intention to dissolve Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI). HTI is an Islamic organization that aspires to establish caliphate government based on the claim of Islamic teaching. The Government considers HTI as a threat to Pancasila. The announcement has created controversy. It has divided Indonesian into pro and contra camp. The dissolution pro camp argues HTI ideology is against Pancasila, Indonesia political ideology. Furthermore, they pointed out HTIâs idea of Caliphate that based on religion would disintegrate the nation. Conversely, the cons argues the government move is against the constitutionally guarantee freedom of association as stipulates in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (hereafter the 1945 Constitution). The move would create precedent that threatens freedom of assembly if the government failed to enact due process procedure and provide justifiable reason for the action. This controversy is not new to human rights and democratic discourse. Karl Popper describes the debate as a paradox of tolerance, democracy, and freedom in an open society. This paper examines how the 1945 Constitution can be utilized to resolve the paradox. This paper argues that Article 28 J par.2 of the 1945 Constitution requires the balance between human rights protection and limitation in its proportion. Thus, the limitation clause should be used as a parameter to solve HTI issue. This paper explores the use of proportionality test in interpreting the limitation clause and applies it not only to the question of HTI issue but also broader issues to evaluate recent government moves in amending the Law Number 17 Year 2013 on Societal Organisation. This paper employs a doctrinal method in its analysis.

Mainstreaming Human Rights in the Asian Judiciary Hanara, Desi
Constitutional Review Vol 4, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Human rights protection in Asia is hindered by the absence of binding human rights instruments and enforcement mechanisms, including the lack of human rights mainstreaming into the works of relevant stakeholders, notably the judiciary. Judiciary plays key roles in the realization and protection of human rights. As the guardian of the Constitution, the Indonesian Constitutional Court (âthe Courtâ) is mandated to protect the human rights of the citizens. This paper argues that the Court, which previously served as the President of the Association of Asian Constitutional Courts and Equivalent Institutions (AACC), has the potential to play a leading role in mainstreaming human rights in the region. Using normative and comparative legal research methodologies, the paper identified the Courtâs mandates on human rights at the national, regional and international levels; assessed the need for human rights mainstreaming in the Asian judiciary; and examined the significant potential of the AACC to house the mainstreaming project. Finally, it proposes several recommendations for the Courtâs consideration, namely to encourage judicial independence, recommend human rights incorporation into judicial discussions and decisions, suggest the establishment of a platform to enhance human rights expertise of the judiciary, as well as facilitate a platform for the development of binding human rights instruments and the establishment of an Asian Human Rights Court.

Revisiting Liberal Democracy and Asian Values in Contemporary Indonesia Ulum, Muhammad Bahrul; Hamida, Nilna Aliyan
Constitutional Review Vol 4, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

This paper aims to examine the complex and often contentious relationship between constitutionalism and integralism in the Indonesian government and provides a criticism of democratization within the contemporary state. Integralist state portrays the relationship between the state and the people as analogous to a family, with the state as a father and the people as children (the Family Principle). Those that adhere to this view, with regard to contemporary Asian politics, claim that Asian values are inherently integralist, that Asiaâs particular history and values different considerably from the Westâs, and that Pancasila, Indonesiaâs state philosophy, is utilized to establish romanticized relations between the ruler and the ruled. The data presented in this paper was collected from relevant articles on Indonesian democracy and Asian values. It also demonstrates how Pancasila, as Indonesiaâs core guiding philosophy, has influenced debates over how the constitutional should be applied and interpreted. As the research shows, during the regimes of Sukarno and Suharto, Pancasila was manipulated in order to promote the goals of the state, and that a reliance on integralism during Indonesiaâs founding years severely diminished human rights and Indonesiaâs capacity for an efficient democracy. By continually putting the priorities of the state above those of the people, the Indonesian government has contradicted its adoption of human rights and liberal democracy is often challenged by the spirit of integralism.

The Obligation of the Constitutional Court of Indonesia to Give Consideration in the Process of Dissolution of Societal Organizations Ahmad Saifulloh, Putra Perdana
Constitutional Review Vol 4, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

The government efforts to dissolve the societal organizations must be carried out in accordance of stages and processes stipulated in the Law on Societal Organizations. Persuasive efforts must be done first before the imposition of administrative sanctions. Administrative sanctions in the form of warning letters and temporary suspensions of activities need to be done before the Government dissolves the societal organizations after a court decision was obtained from the permanent legal force. The writer considered that the dissolution of societal organizations by the Government was urgent for the present, but the Government before dissolving societal organizations should seek consideration from the Constitutional Court of Indonesia as the guardian, and interpreter of Pancasila. Thus, the Constitutional Court of Indonesia as a neutral judicial institution shall have the authority to consider whether a societal organization will be dissolved.

The Function of Judicial Dissent in Indonesia’s Constitutional Court Simon Butt
Constitutional Review Vol 4, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Indonesian judges are permitted to issue dissenting opinions. Constitutional Court judges regularly hand them down. However, neither judges nor academics have outlined the purposes of dissenting opinions in Indonesia. This article aims to promote discussion about what these purposes are, or should be, in Indonesia, with a view to increasing the utility of dissents. It begins by considering the international scholarly literature details some purposes recognised in other countries, such as increased transparency and accountability, but also some disadvantages, such as the perceived weakness of a divided court. It then considers how the Constitutional employs dissents, before exploring some of the uncertainties and unanswered questions about dissents and their use in Indonesia.

Filling the Hole in Indonesia’s Constitutional System: Constitutional Courts and the Review of Regulations in a Split Jurisdiction Tim Lindsey
Constitutional Review Vol 4, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

The Indonesian constitutional system contains a serious flaw that means that the constitutionality of a large number of laws cannot be determined by any court. Although the jurisdiction for the judicial review of laws is split between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court, neither can review the constitutionality of subordinate regulations. This is problematic because in Indonesia the real substance of statutes is often found in implementing regulations, of which there are very many. This paper argues that that is open to the Constitutional Court to reconsider its position on review of regulations in order to remedy this problem. It could do so by interpreting its power of judicial review of statutes to extend to laws below the level of statutes. The paper begins with a brief account of how Indonesia came to have a system of judicial constitutional review that is restricted to statutes. It then examines the experience of South Korea’s Constitutional Court, a court in an Asian civil law country with a split jurisdiction for judicial review of laws like Indonesia’s. Despite controversy, this court has been able to interpret its powers to constitutionally invalidate statutes in such a way as to extend them to subordinate regulations as well. This paper argues that Indonesia’s Constitutional Court should follow South Korea’s example, in order to prevent the possibility of constitutionalism being subverted by unconstitutional subordinate regulations.

Proportionality Test in the 1945 Constitution: Limiting Hizbut Tahrir Freedom of Assembly Giri Ahmad Taufik
Constitutional Review Vol 4, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

In May 2017, Jokowi’s administration announced the intention to dissolve Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI). HTI is an Islamic organization that aspires to establish caliphate government based on the claim of Islamic teaching. The Government considers HTI as a threat to Pancasila. The announcement has created controversy. It has divided Indonesian into pro and contra camp. The dissolution pro camp argues HTI ideology is against Pancasila, Indonesia political ideology. Furthermore, they pointed out HTI’s idea of Caliphate that based on religion would disintegrate the nation. Conversely, the cons argues the government move is against the constitutionally guarantee freedom of association as stipulates in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (hereafter the 1945 Constitution). The move would create precedent that threatens freedom of assembly if the government failed to enact due process procedure and provide justifiable reason for the action. This controversy is not new to human rights and democratic discourse. Karl Popper describes the debate as a paradox of tolerance, democracy, and freedom in an open society. This paper examines how the 1945 Constitution can be utilized to resolve the paradox. This paper argues that Article 28 J par.2 of the 1945 Constitution requires the balance between human rights protection and limitation in its proportion. Thus, the limitation clause should be used as a parameter to solve HTI issue. This paper explores the use of proportionality test in interpreting the limitation clause and applies it not only to the question of HTI issue but also broader issues to evaluate recent government moves in amending the Law Number 17 Year 2013 on Societal Organisation. This paper employs a doctrinal method in its analysis.

Mainstreaming Human Rights in the Asian Judiciary Desi Hanara
Constitutional Review Vol 4, No 1 (2018)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Human rights protection in Asia is hindered by the absence of binding human rights instruments and enforcement mechanisms, including the lack of human rights mainstreaming into the works of relevant stakeholders, notably the judiciary. Judiciary plays key roles in the realization and protection of human rights. As the guardian of the Constitution, the Indonesian Constitutional Court (‘the Court’) is mandated to protect the human rights of the citizens. This paper argues that the Court, which previously served as the President of the Association of Asian Constitutional Courts and Equivalent Institutions (AACC), has the potential to play a leading role in mainstreaming human rights in the region. Using normative and comparative legal research methodologies, the paper identified the Court’s mandates on human rights at the national, regional and international levels; assessed the need for human rights mainstreaming in the Asian judiciary; and examined the significant potential of the AACC to house the mainstreaming project. Finally, it proposes several recommendations for the Court’s consideration, namely to encourage judicial independence, recommend human rights incorporation into judicial discussions and decisions, suggest the establishment of a platform to enhance human rights expertise of the judiciary, as well as facilitate a platform for the development of binding human rights instruments and the establishment of an Asian Human Rights Court.

Home Page

OAI Link

Editorial Team

Contact

Reviewer

Google Scholar

Contact Name
Pan Mohamad Faiz

Contact Email
Pan Mohamad Faiz

Phone
-

Journal Mail Official
consrev@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

Editorial Address
-

Location
Kota adm. jakarta pusat,

Dki jakarta

INDONESIA

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Home Page

OAI Link

Editorial Team

Contact

Reviewer

Google Scholar

Contact Name Pan Mohamad Faiz

Contact Email Pan Mohamad Faiz

Phone -

Journal Mail Official consrev@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

Editorial Address -

Location Kota adm. jakarta pusat, Dki jakarta INDONESIA

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Contact Name
Pan Mohamad Faiz

Contact Email
Pan Mohamad Faiz

Phone
-

Journal Mail Official
consrev@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

Editorial Address
-

Location
Kota adm. jakarta pusat,

Dki jakarta

INDONESIA