Suchergebnisse

Relation between executive and legislative tends to be intricate. Both parties often do not understand the functions and authorities of their respective institutions. At the end, disputes often emerge in playing their roles. This writing tries to discuss the problems concerning two state institutions: the President and the Parliament. The analysis will also address how both institutions manage themselves constitutionally in order not to solely immerse in political interests.

The mixing of authority between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court has raised a range of issues. In turn, there is the contact authority of the two institutions which could lead to the occurrence of legal uncertainty. In connection with the authority testing regulations, for example, although the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court have the same right to test the legislation, but with different types and hierarchy of legislation being tested, then the interpretation of the rules of the legislation for which they were these institutions must be subject to a hierarchical system of laws and regulations that apply. Therefore, the validity of the norm is derived from the legislation is higher. Moreover, any decision of the judicial review of the UUD, this decision is erga omnes, including for judges of the Supreme Court and judges of the court under the Supreme Court.Keywords : Authority, Constitutional Court, Supreme Court

The constitutional design of the Indonesian democracy has undergone several significant changes from President Sukarno’s regime known as Orde Lama or the Old Order (1945-1965) to Era Reformasi or Reformation Era (1998 to present). During the drafting of the 1945 Constitution, the desire to form a democratic system of government that is unique to Indonesia has led its founding fathers to adopt an ambivalent system of government resembling both a parliamentary and presidential systems of government. By investigating the Indonesian democracy and system of government through the analysis of relevant articles of the 1945 Constitution, the present study seeks to address the question how to design a constitutional presidential democracy in Indonesia. The research results show that with the election of president and vice president and their accountability to the People’s Consultative Assembly or Majelis Perwalikan Rakyat (MPR), the design of the Indonesian system of government better fits a parliamentary more than a presidential. However, the four amendments to the 1945 Constitution (from 1999 to 2002) were intended to pave the way for a presidential democracy capable of accommodating the characteristics of a true presidential system of government in Indonesia.

It has been over 72 years since Indonesia proclaimed her independence on 17 August 1945. However, the 350 years of the Dutch colonization is still impacting the lives of the Indonesian people. The difficulties faced by the Indonesian legal system as the government tries to accommodate adat (custom) and religion principles within the national law and the extent to which this legal mechanism affects the everyday life of the Indonesian people. In a nation where customs and religion are so preeminent, setting up an all-inclusive document meant to be the foundation of the state's legal system at the dawn of independence was no easy task. This paper discusses the practice of legal pluralism in Indonesia and its struggle to implement rule of law and human rights principles after a half-century of authoritarian regimes. The study involves socio-legal research drawing on empirical data. Survey research was conducted between September 2014 and February 2015 at Utrecht University, the Netherlands, as well as in 5 cities in Indonesia (Aceh, Bali, Batam, Medan, and Padang) to collect data. The research reveals that legal pluralism is not helping to strengthen the Indonesian legal system, and that the foreignness of the Western law along with the neglect of the Indonesian customary and Islamic laws, totalitarianism and military involvement in politics, corruption within the state apparatus and unsynchronized laws weaken the legal system in Indonesia and hinder its effort to implement rule of law and human rights principles.

One of the manifestations of the implementation of today's sovereignty is the democratically-elected regional head of elections which is the mandate of the country's constitution. In the course of the dispute of the result of the election of the head of the area there is a provision of the difference in votes in Article 158 of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Election of the Governor, the Regent, and the Mayor who constitutes a formal requirement to be able to dispute to the Constitutional Court. The purpose of this study is to analyze the basis of the determination of the threshold for submission of the dispute result of the election of the regional head to the Constitutional Court and how the implications of the sound threshold contained in the election law of the regional head.

This study applies an empirical juridical research approach that is more focused on problem solving to examine the implementation of the law from the regulations governing it; especially reviewing the standard agreement documents using the principle of freedom of contract, the consensual principle, and the principle of good faith and propriety which can be concluded from the Articles concerning related agreements, as well as the regulations governing the work agreement of PT Sumberdaya Dian Mandiri regarding the provision of outsourcing services for PT Bank Mandiri (Persero) Tbk Padang. The results of the study show that there is no clear understanding of outsourcing in the Law; but it only contains the provisions of the work agreement, collective labor agreement, worker service agreement, and work contract agreement. However, in this case, the outsourcing work agreement did not apply the full freedom of contract principle in which Nining Sri Rahayu and Regina Aulia Ansori were only asked to sign a work agreement draft prepared by PT Sumberdaya Dian Mandiri. In addition, this agreement had fully implemented a balanced consensual principle in which Nining Sri Rahayu and Regina Aulia Ansori had the choice to accept or reject the contents of the agreement. However, the difficulty in finding a job resulted in Nining Sri Rahayu and Regina Aulia Ansori choosing to sign the agreement. Thus, the rights of outsourcing workers are not fully guaranteed by the outsourcing company.

One of the manifestations of the implementation of today's sovereignty is the democratically-elected regional head of elections which is the mandate of the country's constitution. In the course of the dispute of the result of the election of the head of the area there is a provision of the difference in votes in Article 158 of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Election of the Governor, the Regent, and the Mayor who constitutes a formal requirement to be able to dispute to the Constitutional Court. The purpose of this study is to analyze the basis of the determination of the threshold for submission of the dispute result of the election of the regional head to the Constitutional Court and how the implications of the sound threshold contained in the election law of the regional head.

The Constitutional Court of Indonesia functions in one of the most diverse societies in the world. It is required to resolve disputes within a kaleidoscope of diversity and plurality with flexibility, pragmatism, asymmetry, and wisdom. Whilst national minimum norms are important for nation-building, recognition of local customs, diversities and indigenous systems are equally important to protect the territorial integrity of Indonesia and ensure local peace and stability. Responding to demands of religious plurality, customary lands rights, traditional voting systems, decentralisation to regions and local governments, and responding to diversity of community life, requires extraordinary skill, insight and flexibility. This book gives insight into twenty years of jurisprudence and places it in an international comparison.

In order to ensure the suffrage of citizens is implemented according to the principle of fair election, regulations on general and local elections may contain various kinds of restriction of suffrage. The rights to vote as well as be voted must be restricted in a way that the process of election may run seamlessly and generate a government capable of exercising the mandate of the people. However, such restriction must be performed in a fair and proportionate manner. The restriction must not cause uncertainty or even distinction of treatment towards the citizens. By means of normative legal research, this research comes to a conclusion that restriction of suffrage in general and local elections have yet been performed fairly. Legal uncertainty in the restriction of suffrage still occurs. Simultaneously, different treatment towards citizens who intend to nominate themselves is still contained in the norms related to the requirements to vote and be voted.