Dimensi Judicial Activism dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1328Keywords:
Constitutional Court, Constitutional Rights, Democracy, Judicial ActivismAbstract
A transformative amendment of the 1945 Constitution established a separate judicial institution called the Constitutional Court. This institution is believed to serve a strategic role within Indonesia’s plural legal system particularly in the area of constitutional review and constitutional rights protection. However, the performance of the Constitutional Court has attracted controversy. This controversy arises because the Court is concerned with introducing a sociological paradigm of law that embraces substantive justice with a fluid acknowledgment of procedural justice. A key criticism of the Constitutional Court is that the nature of Court decisions has developed into a practice of judicial activism. This article discusses the dimension of judicial activism used by the Constitutional Court on the grounds for protecting constitutional rights of the citizens through its decisions. It also analyses the extent of judicial activism that can be justified in the decision-making process in the Constitutonal Court.
References
Anung, Pramono, Komunikasi Politik dan Pemaknaan Anggota Legislatif terhadap Konstituen: Studi Interpretif Pemilu 2009, Disertasi Doktoral, Universitas Padjajaran, Bandung, 2013.
Buck, Christopher G., “Judicial Activism” dalam Gary L. Anderson dan Kathryn
G. Herr, editor, Encyclopedia of Activism and Social Justice, California: SAGE Publication, 2007, h. 785 – 788.
Butt, Simon A., Judicial Review in Indonesia: Between Civil Law and Accountability?: A Study of Constitutional Court Decisions 2003-2005, PhD Thesis, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, 2006.
Brewer-Carías, Allan R., “Constitutional Courts as Positive Legislators” dalam Karen B. Brown dan David V. Snyder, editor, General Reports of the XVIIIth Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law, Springer, 2012, h. 549 – 569.
Canon, Bradley C., “Defining the Dimensions of Judicial Activism”, Judicature, Volume 66, Issue 6, Desember 1982, h. 236 – 247.
Craven, Greg, “Reflections on Judicial Activism: More in Sorrow than in Anger”, makalah disampaikan dalam the Ninth Conference of the Samuel Griffith Society, Perth, 24-26 Oktober 1997.
Faiz, Pan Mohamad, “Relevansi Doktrin Negative Legislator”, Mahkamah, Nomor 108, Februari 2016.
French, Robert S., “Judicial Activism – The Boundaries of the Judicial Role”, LAWASIA Conference, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, 10 November 2009.
Galligan, Brian, “Judicial Activism in Australia” dalam Kenneth M. Holland, editor, Judicial Activism in Comparative Perspective, London: Macmillan, 1991.
Garner, Bryan A. dan Henry Campbell Black, Black’s Law Dictionary, Minnesota: West Group, 2004.
Kelsen, Hans, “Judicial Review of Legislation”, The Journal of Politics, Volume 4, Issue 2, Mei 1942, h. 183 – 200.
Kmiec, Keenan D., “The Origin and Current Meanings of ‘Judicial Activism’”, California Law Review, Volume 92, Issue 5, Oktober 2004, h. 1441 – 1477.
Lovis-McMahon, David, Substantive Justice: How the Substantive Law Shapes Perceived Fairness, Master Thesis, Tempe: The Arizona State University, 2011.
Mahfud MD, Moh., “Peran Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Pembangunan Hukum Progresif untuk Keadilan Sosial”, makalah disampaikan dalam Seminar Menembus Kebuntuan Legalitas Formal Menuju Pembangunan Hukum dengan Pendekatan Hukum Progresif, Fakultas Hukum Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, 19 December 2009.
Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia, Naskah Komprehensif Perubahan Undang- Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945, Jakarta: Sekretaris Jenderal dan Kepaniteraan MKRI, Edisi 1, Volume 6, 2010.
Marshall, William P., “Conservatives and the Seven Sins of Judicial Activism”, University of Colorado Law Review, Volume 73, Issue 4, September 2002, h. 1217 – 1255.
Mietzner, Marcus, “Political Conflict Resolution and Democratic Consolidation in Indonesia: The Role of the Constitutional Court”, Journal of East Asian Studies, Volume 10, Issue 3, September 2010, 397 – 424.
Rahardjo, Satjipto, Membedah Hukum Progresif, Jakarta: Kompas, 2006. Rahardjo, Satjipto, Penegakan Hukum Progresif, Jakarta: Kompas, 2010.
Setara Institute, Laporan Survey Persepsi 200 Ahli Tata Negara terhadap Kinerja
Mahkamah Konstitusi RI, Jakarta: Setara Institute, 2013.
Schaefer, David Lewis, “Procedural versus Substantive Justice: Rawls and Nozick”,
Social Philosophy and Policy, Volume 24, Issue 1, Januari 2007, h. 164 – 186.
Soedijarto, “Some Notes on the Ideals and Goals of Indonesia’s National Education System and the Inconsistency of its Implementation: A Comparative Analysis”, Journal of Indonesian Social Science and Humanities, Volume 2, 2009, h. 1 – 11.
Smithey, Shannon Ishiyama dan John Ishiyama, “Judicial Activism in Post- Communist Politics”, Law and Society Review, Volume 36, Issue 4, Januari 2002, h. 719 – 742.
Siahaan, Maruarar, Implementasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang: Studi tentang Mekanisme Checks and Balances di Indonesia, Disertasi Doktoral, Fakultas Hukum Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, 2010.
Tate, C. Neal dan Torbjorn Vallinder, The Global Expansion of Judicial Power, New York: University Press, 1995.
B. Konstitusi dan Undang-Undang:
Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.
Konstitusi Brasil
Konstitusi Taiwan
Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi.
C. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi:
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 072-073/PUU-II/2004 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 11/PUU-III/2005 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2003 tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 12/PUU-VI/2005 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 36 Tahun 2004 tentang Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Negara Tahun Anggaran 2005.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 26/PUU-III/2005 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2005 tentang Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Negara Tahun Anggaran 2006.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 24/PUU-V/2007 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2003 tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional dan Undang-Undang Nomor 18 Tahun 2006 tentang Anggaran Pendidikan dan Belanja Negara Tahun 2007.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 22-24/PUU-VI/2008 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 2008 tentang Pemilihan Umum Anggota DPR, DPD, dan DPRD.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 102/PUU-VII/2009 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 2008 tentang Pemilihan Umum Presiden dan Wakil Presiden.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 110-111-112-113/PUU-VII/2009 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 2008 tentang Pemilihan Umum Anggota DPR, DPD, dan DPRD.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 5/PUU-IX/2011 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2002 tentang Komisi Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 81/PUU-IX/2011 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2011 tentang Penyelenggara Pemilihan Umum.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 85/PUU-X/2012 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 97/PUU-XI/2013 mengenai Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2008 tentang Perubahan Kedua Undang- Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintah Daerah dan Undang- Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman.
E. Internet:
“Busyro to serve full 4-year term as KPK Chief”, The Jakarta Post, 20 Juni 2011. Transparency International, “Global Corruption Barometer 2013: Indonesia”, http://www.transparency.org/gcb2013/country/?country=indonesia, diunduh 26 Februari 2016.
Downloads
How to Cite
Issue
Section
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.