Judicial Consistency dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Penodaan Agama

Zaka Firma Aditya

Abstract


Tulisan ini hendak membahas mengenai konsistensi putusan-putusan mahkamah konstitusi dalam pengujian undang-undang berdasarkan asas preseden. MK beberapa kali dipandang tidak konsisten karena kerap mengeluarkan putusan yang bersifat overrulling. Namun, sebenarnya tidak sedikit juga putusan MK yang konsisten mengikuti preseden. Meskipun penggunaan asas preseden hanya dikenal di negara yang menganut tradisi common law, MK ternyata juga menerapkannya. Putusan MK tentang pengujian UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama adalah salah satu bentuk dianutnya asas preseden di MK. Putusan ini secara konsisten menyatakan bahwa UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama tetap konstitusional karena akan terjadi kekosongan hukum apabila UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama diputus inkonstitusional. Dalam perkara tersebut, MK mempertahankan ratio decidendinya terhadap konstitusionalnya UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama karena meskipun MK sadar bahwa UU a quo banyak mengandung kelemahan. Konsistensi standing MK terhadap UU Pencegahan Penodaan Agama ini merupakan salah satu bentuk dari dipraktekannya doktrin preseden.

This paper will discuss the consistency of the constitutional court decision in the judicial review cases based on the principle of precedent. MK several times deemed inconsistent because often issued a ruling that is overruling. However, there were actually a lot of MK decisions that consistently followed the precedent. Although the use of the precedent principle is only known in common law tradition, the Constitutional Court apparently also applies it. The Constitutional Court’s decision regarding the Blasphemy Prevention Act was one form of the principle of precedent in the Constitutional Court. This decision consistently states that the Blasphemy Prevention Act remains constitutional because a legal vacuum will occur if the Blasphemy Prevention Law was decided to be unconstitutional. In this case, the Court retained its ratio decidendi to the constitutionality of the Blasphemy Prevention Law, even though the Court was aware that the Law contained many weaknesses. The consistency of the Constitutional Court on the judicial review of the Blasphemy Prevention Act is one form of the practice of precedent doctrine.


Keywords


preseden; stare decicis; konsistensi; ratio decidendi; penodaan agama

Full Text:

PDF

References


Buku

Amos, Abraham H. F., 2007, Legal Opinion Teoritis & Empirisme. Jakarta: PT Grafindo Persada.

Cruz, Peter De, 1999, Comparative Law in Changing The World, London/Sydney: Cavendish Publishing Ltd.

Dainow, Joseph (Ed.), 1974, The role of judicial decisions and doctrine in civil law and mixed jurisdictions, Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press.

Garner, Bryan A., 2016, Black's Law Dictionary 10th Edition. St. Paul-New York: West Group.

Marzuki, Peter Mahmud, 2014, Penelitian Hukum, Edisi Revisi, Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.

Mertokusumo, Sudikno, 2009, Penemuan Hukum Sebuah Pengantar, Yogyakarta: Liberty.

Pompe, Sebastiaan, 2012, Runtuhnya Institusi Mahkamah Agung, Jakarta: Lembaga Kajian dan Advokasi untuk Independensi Peradilan.

Radbruch, Gustav, 1973, Rechtsphilosophie, Stuttgart: K.F. Koehler Verlag.

Scalia, Antonin, 1997, A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and The Law, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Jurnal

Aditya, Zaka Firma dan Al-Fatih, Sholahuddin, “State Liability for Violation of Constitutional Rights Againts Indegenous People in Freedom of Religion and Belief”, Brawijaya Law Journal, 4(1), 2017, h. 29-58.

Black, H. Campbell, “The Principle of Stare Decisis," The American Law Register, Volume 34, 1886, h. 745-757.

Brewbaker, Willian S., “Found Law, Made Law and Creation: Reconsidering Blackstone’s Declaratory Theory”, Journal of Law and Religion, XXII (255), 2006/2007.

Farber, Daniel A., “The rule of Law and The Law and Precedents”, Barkeley Law Review, University of Barkeley, 2005, h. 1173-1203.

Fon, Vincy & Farisi, Francesco, “Judicial Precedent in Civil Law Systems: A Dynamic analysis”, International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, Volume 26, 2006, h. 519–535.

Goodhart, Arthur L., “Determining The Ratio Decidendi of a case”, Yale Law Journal, Vol. XL( 2), December 1930, h. 161-185.

Gustavo, Fernandes de Andrade, Comparative Constitutional Law: Judicial Review, university of Pennsylvania of constitutional law, 2001, h. 977-999.

Hondies, Ewoud, “Precedent in East and West”, Pennsylvania State International Law Review, 523 (23), 2005.

Tesis

Aditya, Zaka Firma, Putusan Judicial Review Mahkamah Konstitusi yang Bersifat Retroaktif dan Akibat Hukumnya, Tesis, Universitas Airlangga, 2017.

Putusan Pengadilan

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 140/PUU-VII/2009 tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 1/PNPS/1965 tentang Pencegahan Penyalahgunaan dan/atau Penodaan Agama Terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 84/PUU-X/2012 tentang Pengujian Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana dan Undang-Undang Nomor 1/PNPS/1965 tentang Pencegahan Penyalahgunaan dan/atau Penodaan Agama Terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 56/PUU-XV/2017 tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 1/PNPS/1965 tentang Pencegahan Penyalahgunaan dan/atau Penodaan Agama Terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.

Undang-Undang

Undang-Undang Nomor 1/PNPS/1965 tentang Pencegahan Penyalahgunaan dan/atau Penodaan Agama




DOI: https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1714

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 76 times
PDF view : 43 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.