This article deals primarily with complaint handling system with reference to an ombudsman that established by the government as opposed to the private ombudsman variety in Indonesia and Australia's jurisdictions. In practice, group of people or persons have often arisen complaints or grievances in public service, and it requires solutions. It is widely known that the Ombudsman office has long been regarded as an effective office in resolving people complaint. This is mainly because the nature of the Ombudsman as an independent and impartial institution. This article argues that regardless of the different context of introduction of an ombudsman in Indonesia and Australia because of different political and social context, however, the performance of ombudsman in both countries has showed significant role in enhancing public services through their expanded mandates and stronger powers.
It is important to note at the outset that the terms 'nationality' and 'citizenship' are used interchangeably in this report. Moreover, the terms 'nationality' and 'citizenship' refer to a 'politico-legal' term denoting membership of a state (Weis 1979: 1). The Indonesian citizenship regime has been formed through two fundamental historical processes: "decolonization and the emergence of multi-ethnic states, and postcolonial nation building in a period of emerging globalization" (Hassall 1999: 49). The first process has resulted in an emphasis on citizenship as a 'boundary', whereas the second has seen citizenship as a more complicated concept, involving a "site of ideological construction" (ibid.). In the transition period to independence, the socio-political as well as legal character of Indonesia was determined through several competing ideologies of politics, culture, religion and ethnicity. However, it is important to note that during Dutch colonisation, there was a legal policy regulated by Article 163 of the Indische Staatsregeling (the Constitution of the colony of the Dutch East Indies) which created a racial division of the population of the Dutch East Indies into three categories: Europeans and its equivalent group (mostly Christians); far eastern (mainly Chinese and Arabs); and indigenous people (pribumi).1 Unsurprisingly, the Indonesian citizenship regime has, thus, been heavily characterised by nationalism, rather than any other issues such as culture. ; Research for the 2016/2017 GLOBALCIT Reports has been supported by the European University Institute's Global Governance Programme, the EUI Research Council, and the British Academy Research Project CITMODES (co-directed by the EUI and the University of Edinburgh).
The existence and movement of diasporas across the world significantly challenge the existing legal norms on citizenship and migration. The responses from law-makers from the origin countries vary. Most European, Latin America and African countries adopt dual citizenship laws. However, most countries in Asia-Pacific region, including Indonesia, do not favour dual citizenship. This is mostly because of the ideological perception of citizenship. In this sense, many countries grant special status or schemes to their diaspora (neither citizens nor residents of the country) in the form of an external quasi-citizenship based on ethnic descent, called "ethnizenship" by Bauböck.This article, drawing on on-going research, compares the Indonesian experience with that of two other countries that have adopted quasi-citizenship schemes. India and South Korea have been chosen for comparison since both countries have particular statutes that recognise and regulate diaspora status. India created the Person of Indian Origin (PIO) card scheme in 1998 and Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) card scheme in 2003. These two schemes merged in 2015 into the Overseas Citizens of India Card Holder (OCC) scheme through the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2015. While India adopts a regulatory model of diaspora through a citizenship law regime, the South Korean experience showsa different attitude towards their diaspora. The Korean Government has refused the Korean diaspora's proposal for dual citizenship and created a semi-citizenship called "Overseas Korean" status through immigration law. This article discusses the Indian and South Korean experiences dealing with their diaspora in order to propose a regulatory model for Indonesia's diaspora.
The review of the constitutionality of norms is a control mechanism that is carried out on the law-making procedures (procedural review) and the substance of the norm (substantive review). This is a consequence of a constitutional state and the rule of law. Cases of procedural review have often occurred in Indonesia, but the understanding and regulation is still relatively inconsistent as on substantive review. One of the reasons why this condition occurred is due to the lack of regulation regarding the procedure for the law-making process in the Constitution which is an indicator of the procedural review. Therefore, this study tries to answer the nature or urgency of the procedural review, by questioning what was tested by the Constitutional Court in the formal examination? This is doctrinal research which using a conceptual and cases approach in Indonesia, Kolombia, and South Africa. The selection of the case are carried out according to the functional comparative law method, which also considered on non-legal factors such as social and political factors that influence the norm. The results of the study found that the urgency of procedural review is to ensure that the law has fulfilled the aspects of legitimacy and validity. Legitimacy is arisen through meaningful participation, whereas validity comes from the conformity of the law-making processes with the procedures and can be proven materially, not only fulfilling formal requirements.
The Third Amendment to the 1945 Constitution stipulates that one of the requirements to become a presidential candidate is an Indonesian natural-born citizen who has never received another citizenship of his/her own volition. The requirement can create confusion and dissenting opinions to determine persons considered natural-born citizens and methods to prove it. This study explores the significances of determining a natural-born citizen as a requirement to become a presidential candidate and its implications. Through a socio-legal approach, this study concludes that the natural-born citizen requirement's significance is to eliminate racial discrimination from the previous requirement of a "native Indonesian" president and to ensure convincing allegiance from the president. There are some implications of the requirement. First, every Indonesian citizen born after the establishment of the Citizenship Law 2006, regardless of ethnic status, is called a natural-born citizen, including those from mixed marriages and having limited dual citizenship up to the age of 18 years. Meanwhile, for Indonesian citizens born before the Citizenship Law 2006, the natural-born citizen status is determined based on Law 3 of 1946 and Law 62 of 1958, including Indonesia's agreement with the Netherlands and China. Second, a natural-born citizen status mutatis mutandis should require of other constitutional positions, either executive, legislative, or judiciary, and to a presidential candidate's husband or wife.Natural Born Citizen sebagai Syarat Presiden Indonesia: Arti Penting dan ImplikasiAbstrakAmandemen Ketiga UUD 1945 menetapkan salah satu syarat calon presiden adalah kewarganegaraan sejak kelahiran (natural-born citizen) dan tidak pernah menerima kewarganegaraan lain karena kehendaknya sendiri. Syarat tersebut dapat menimbulkan kebingungan tentang siapa saja yang dapat dianggap sebagai warga negara sejak kelahiran dan bagaimana pembuktiannya. Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk menelusuri arti penting penetapan natural-born citizen sebagai syarat presiden dan implikasinya. Melalui pendekatan sosio-legal, artikel ini menyimpulkan arti penting syarat natural-born citizen adalah untuk menghilangkan diskriminasi rasial dari syarat presiden "orang Indonesia asli" dan untuk menjamin kesetiaan yang kuat dari presiden. Adapun implikasinya, pertama, setiap WNI yang lahir setelah berlakunya UU Kewarganegaraan tahun 2006, jika sejak kelahirannya telah berstatus WNI, tanpa melihat status etnis, disebut sebagai natural born citizen, termasuk di dalamnya berasal dari perkawinan campuran dan memiliki kewarganegaraan ganda terbatas sampai dengan usia 18 tahun. Sementara WNI yang lahir sebelum UU Kewarganegaraan tahun 2006, penentuan status WNI sejak kelahiran berdasarkan pengaturan UU 3 Tahun 1946 dan UU 62 Tahun 1958 termasuk perjanjian-perjanjian yang diadakan Indonesia dengan Belanda dan Tiongkok. Kedua, natural born citizen secara mutatis mutandis seharusnya diberlakukan bagi syarat jabatan ketatanegaraan lainnya baik eksekutif, legislatif, maupun yudikatif, serta terhadap suami atau istri calon Presiden karena alasan kesetiaan.Kata Kunci: kesetiaan, kewarganegaraan sejak kelahiran, syarat presiden.DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v7n3.a1
The Third Amendment to the 1945 Constitution has regulated new requirements for presidential candidates. One of which is the requirement to be mentally and physically capable of carrying out the duties and obligations of the presidential office. This research aims to find the reason for formulating norms or legal ratio of the formation of such a requirement. The nature of this research is qualitative research using a normative-empirical and comparative approach. The results reveal several legal ratios of the requirement. First, the requirement is considered important because the president has the highest position within the governmental structures. Second reason refers to the close relation between health and decision-making matters, and the third demonstrates reasonable and justifiable limitations from the perspective of human rights. Comparison with several countries exposes that the requirement is fundamental since the president has dual functions, namely a head of state and a chief of government. This research also exhibits that the legal basis of the requirement is not in accordance with the 1945 Constitution since the existing regulation takes the form of the Decree of the General Election Commission. Therefore, this research recommends the appropriate legal basis to further regulate mental and physical requirements by law which regulates some fundamental principles dealing with such requirements.
