Implementasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 92/PUU-X/2012 Terkait Kewenangan Dewan Perwakilan Daerah dalam Pembentukan UndangUndang
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1236Keywords:
Verdict of Constitutional Court, Implementation, Rule, BehaviourAbstract
Why Constitutional Court verdict Number. 92/PUU-X/2012 attractive to serve as an object of research? The main reason is, there is a problem that is visible on the implementation of the Decision. The problem shown in fact that can be observed after the verdict was pronounced in the plenary session of the Constitutional Court. Up to almost 1 (one) year later, since pronounced in the plenary session, the Constitutional Court also considered yet implemented. This research seeks to express the fact that covers the implementation of Constitutional Court Decision No. 92/PUU-X/2012. Therefore, although more as a normative-doctrinal research and/or prescriptive with the focus of study that leads to the question of “how it should act”, this research is very likely propose another style that touches the issue of “what happened” and “why it happened”. The purpose of the implementation of this study was to determine and explain about the implementation of the Constitutional Court Number 92/PUU-X/2012, including to identify and explain the obstacles and difficulties in the implementation of the Constitutional Court Decision No. 92/PUU-X/2012, and find out and explain the legal politics legislation following the Ruling of the Constitutional Court Number 92/PUU-X/2012. In this theoretical framework introduced some basic concepts that are key aspects to strengthen the argument in this study. In this regard, this study uses a few basic concepts, namely: (1) the law not only as a rule (rule) but also behavior (behavior), (2) awareness and compliance with the law; (3) The strength of binding court decisions, and (4) Due to legal and implementation models court decision.
References
Abdul Latif, 2007, Fungsi Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Mewujudkan Negara Hukum Demokrasi, Yogyakarta: Total Media, h. 61.
Alexander Hamilton,1961, The Federalist Papers, Mentor Book, The New American Library, 1961.
Badan Legislasi DPR RI, 2013, Naskah Akademis Rancangan Undang-Undang Tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 27 Tahun 2009 Tentang Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah, Dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat RI, h. 61.
Bede Harris, Esential Constitutional Law, Sydney-London-Portland, Oregon: Cavendish Publishing, 2000, h. 2.
Ernst Benda, 2005, Pelaksanaan Keputusan Mahkamah Konstitusi di Negara-Negara Transformasi dengan Contoh Indonesia, Jakarta: Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, h. 15.
Feri Amsari, 2013, Konflik Legislasi DPR-DPD, Koran Tempo, 5 Juli 2013.
Georg Vanberg, 2005, The Politics of Contitutional Review in Germany, Political Economy of Institution and Decision, Cambridge University Press, h. 2-8.
Jimly Asshiddiqie, 2003, Hubungan Kerja Antara DPD Dengan DPR dan Lembaga Negara Lainnya Dalam Buku Dewan Perwakilan Daerah Dalam Sistem Ketatanegaraan Republik Indonesia, Jakarta: Sekretariat Jenderal MPR dan UNDP, h. 116-117.
Jimly Asshiddiqie, 2005, Konstitusi dan Konstitusionalisme Indonesia, Jakarta: Konpress, 2005, h. 188.
Johny Ibrahim, 2005, Teori dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif, Malang: Bayumedia, h. 302.
Mukti Fajar dan Yulianto Achmad, 2010, Dualisme Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, h. 34.
Peter Mahmud Marzuki, 2011, Penelitian Hukum, Jakarta: Kencana, 2011, h. 89.
Richo Wahyudi, 2010, Pembaharuan Hukum, Tesis Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, h. 50.
Robert H. Fallon, Jr., 2001, Implementing the Constitution, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusset, and London, England, h. 37.
Soetandyo Wignjosoebroto, Tentang Kajian “Hukum dan Masyarakat”: Sebuah Pengenalan, http://soetandyo.wordpress.com/2011/07/11/tentang-kajian-hukum-dan-masyarakat-sebuah-pengenalan/#more-197, diunduh 7 Januari 2014.
Soerjono Soekanto, 1986, Pengantar Penelitian Hukum, Jakarta: UI Press, h. 251-252.
Stephen Sherlock, 2005, Indonesia’s Regional Representative Assembly: Democracy, Representation and the Regions, Centre for Democratic Institutions Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University.
“DPR-DPD agar ubah tatib sikapi Putusan MK”, 26 Juni 2013, http://koran-indonesia.com/2013/06/dpr-dpd-agar-ubah-tatib-sikapi-putusan-mk/#.U0yfcqJaeSw. Diakses 22 Maret 2014.
Alexander Hamilton,1961, The Federalist Papers, Mentor Book, The New American Library, 1961.
Badan Legislasi DPR RI, 2013, Naskah Akademis Rancangan Undang-Undang Tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 27 Tahun 2009 Tentang Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah, Dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat RI, h. 61.
Bede Harris, Esential Constitutional Law, Sydney-London-Portland, Oregon: Cavendish Publishing, 2000, h. 2.
Ernst Benda, 2005, Pelaksanaan Keputusan Mahkamah Konstitusi di Negara-Negara Transformasi dengan Contoh Indonesia, Jakarta: Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, h. 15.
Feri Amsari, 2013, Konflik Legislasi DPR-DPD, Koran Tempo, 5 Juli 2013.
Georg Vanberg, 2005, The Politics of Contitutional Review in Germany, Political Economy of Institution and Decision, Cambridge University Press, h. 2-8.
Jimly Asshiddiqie, 2003, Hubungan Kerja Antara DPD Dengan DPR dan Lembaga Negara Lainnya Dalam Buku Dewan Perwakilan Daerah Dalam Sistem Ketatanegaraan Republik Indonesia, Jakarta: Sekretariat Jenderal MPR dan UNDP, h. 116-117.
Jimly Asshiddiqie, 2005, Konstitusi dan Konstitusionalisme Indonesia, Jakarta: Konpress, 2005, h. 188.
Johny Ibrahim, 2005, Teori dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif, Malang: Bayumedia, h. 302.
Mukti Fajar dan Yulianto Achmad, 2010, Dualisme Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, h. 34.
Peter Mahmud Marzuki, 2011, Penelitian Hukum, Jakarta: Kencana, 2011, h. 89.
Richo Wahyudi, 2010, Pembaharuan Hukum, Tesis Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, h. 50.
Robert H. Fallon, Jr., 2001, Implementing the Constitution, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusset, and London, England, h. 37.
Soetandyo Wignjosoebroto, Tentang Kajian “Hukum dan Masyarakat”: Sebuah Pengenalan, http://soetandyo.wordpress.com/2011/07/11/tentang-kajian-hukum-dan-masyarakat-sebuah-pengenalan/#more-197, diunduh 7 Januari 2014.
Soerjono Soekanto, 1986, Pengantar Penelitian Hukum, Jakarta: UI Press, h. 251-252.
Stephen Sherlock, 2005, Indonesia’s Regional Representative Assembly: Democracy, Representation and the Regions, Centre for Democratic Institutions Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University.
“DPR-DPD agar ubah tatib sikapi Putusan MK”, 26 Juni 2013, http://koran-indonesia.com/2013/06/dpr-dpd-agar-ubah-tatib-sikapi-putusan-mk/#.U0yfcqJaeSw. Diakses 22 Maret 2014.
Downloads
Published
2016-05-20
How to Cite
Laksono, Fajar, Anna Triningsih, Ajie Ramdan, and Indah Karmadaniah. 2016. “Implementasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 92 PUU-X 2012 Terkait Kewenangan Dewan Perwakilan Daerah Dalam Pembentukan UndangUndang”. Jurnal Konstitusi 12 (3):542-68. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1236.
Issue
Section
Articles
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Copyright of the published articles will be transferred to the journal as the publisher of the manuscripts. Therefore, the author confirms that the copyright has been managed by the publisher.
- The publisher of Jurnal Konstitusi is The Registrar and Secretariat General of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia.
- The copyright follows Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License: This license allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms.
