Suchergebnisse

AbstrakSistem ketatanegaraan Indonesia mensyaratkan dilakukannya pemilihan umum dalam hal mengisi jabatan Presiden.Mekanisme tersebut merupakan sebuah mekanisme hukum. Dalam sistem ketatanegaraan ketika pengisian jabatan Presiden melalui sebuah proses hukum, harusnya pemberhentian Presiden juga harus melalui proses hukum. Namun yang terjadi pada sejarah pemberhentian Presiden di Indonesia proses yang dilakukan merupakan sebuah proses politik dengan menjatuhkan Presiden dengan alasan politik semata. Penelitian ini mengkaji mekanisme pemberhentian Presiden di Indonesia Pasca Amandemen UUD 1945. Penelitian menunjukkan bahwa, hasil yang didapatkan dari buah pemikiran amandemen UUD 1945 dalam kaitannya dengan pemakzulan Presiden adalah, perubahan mekanisme pemakzulan dari proses politik ke proses hukum. Kemudian dengan adanya MK sebagai Forum Previlegiatum, maka pendapat DPR yang merupakan pendapat politik menjadi sebuah pendapat hokum. Kata kunci: Impeachment, Tata Negara, Indonesia

Kasus impeachment Kepala Daerah, diantaranya menimpa Wali Kota Surabaya, Sunarto. Yang bersangkutan dianggap tidak melaksanakan tugas karena berobat ke luar negeri tanpa ijin legislatif daerah setempat, sehingga DPRD Kota Surabaya mengusulkan kepada Presiden melalui Mendagri untuk memberhentikan Sunarto. Kasus serupa menimpa pula pada Bupati Payakumbuh dan Buleleng. Legislatif daerah setempat menolak pertanggungjawaban tahunan kedua Bupati tersebut. Kenapa Legislatif pada masa reformasi ini begitu besar kekuasaannya dibanding pada jaman orde baru? Apabila kita cermati, pada masa lalu kepala daerah hanya mengenal pertanggungjawaban pada akhir masa jabatan, yang pelaksanaannya lebih menjurus hanya kepada formalitas. Pada saat sekarang keadaan berbalik, legislatif tidak begitu saja mau menerima pertanggungjawaban eksekutifnya. Mereka sangat garang dan kadang membuat ciut Kepala Daerah. Bahkan kadang-kadang ketika pertanggungjawaban belum disampaikan, jauh-jauh hari legislatif sudah mengancam akan menolak pertanggungjawaban kepada daerah tersebut.

The Ferguson case in 1917 represents the only instance of the impeachment and conviction of a state official in Texas. The law of impeachment must then be sought in the proceedings of the Ferguson trial, the opinions of the attorney-general, and the opinion of the supreme court in 1924 in the case of Ferguson v. Maddox, which reviewed the legality of the 1917 proceedings in determining whether Mr. Ferguson was eligible to have his name placed on the primary election ballot as a candidate for governor.Impeachment at a Special Session. The constitution provides that the governor may on extraordinary occasions convene the legislature in special sessions limited to thirty days' duration, during which there shall be no legislation upon subjects other than those designated in the proclamation of the governor calling the session or presented by him. The facts in the Ferguson case may be reviewed briefly. The speaker of the House of Representatives, on his own motion, had issued a call for the House to meet in special session on August 1, 1917, to consider the impeachment of the governor. Before the members could assemble, the governor issued a call for a special session of the legislature to meet at the same time as that set by the speaker's call for the purpose of considering the matter of university appropriations. The House proceeded with the investigation and impeached the governor, who was thereupon suspended from office.

The impeachment process is one of the most serious government proceedings in the United States. This guide dispels the most common myths about the process while setting forth a definition of what it means for a president to be impeached. It includes full-color photographs, sidebars, a glossary, suggestions for further reading, and an index

Plus: a shaky bipartisan border deal, the looming Taylor Swift PSYOP, and the disappearance of the D.C. area's greatest landmark...

Charles Black's Impeachment: A Handbook, first published in 1974 at the height of the Watergate crisis, has become the authoritative guide on the subject of presidential impeachment. In September, the Yale University Press published a new edition of the classic handbook, incorporating a new preface and new material by constitutional theorist Philip Bobbitt. Bobbitt's contribution to the new edition appears in the Essay that follows. Because Professor Black's original text had no accompanying notes, the publisher decided to continue this format in the new print edition. In this re-publication, the Journal worked with Bobbitt to present his chapters with extensive notes in order to provide a resource for students, scholars, lawyers, journalists, and public officials.