Karakteristik Ne Bis In Idem dan Unsurnya dalam Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi

Ilhamdi Putra; Khairul Fahmi

doi:10.31078/jk1824

Karakteristik Ne Bis In Idem dan Unsurnya dalam Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi

Ilhamdi Putra, Khairul Fahmi

Abstract

Ne bis in idem principle in Mahkamah Konstitusi procedural law (Constitutional Court– CC) found in Article 60 Paragraph (1) of CC Act, in prohibition form to return to trial norms previously reviewed. Discrete from Criminal Code and Civil Code which exact ne bis in idem elements, Article 60 Paragraph (1) has sole element within object review form. This research examines two problems: what are ne bis in idem principle characteristics, and what are the elements in the CC procedural law? The normative judicial research method used to understand ne bis in idem principle elative. Ne bis in idem adaptation in CC procedural law resulted broad philosophical shifts that unaffected Petitioners' legal standing and legality of the object that could bring against them. Based on decision systematics, CC put arguments ne bis in idem at Conclusion, so that it is not a verdict. Meanwhile, ne bis in idem principle in CC procedural law carry several norms, however CC Act only has two elements in legal object and legal subject-relationship forms. Meanwhile, the third element in legal development form is found in the CC decision. Because the legal standing of the Petitioners' and the legality of the object that can be challenged was not disturbed, the three elements did not apply accumulatively, in which the element of legal development was more determinant than the other two elements. As result, constitutionality actualization either occurs through positive decisions granted Petitioners' petition, moreover occurred in cases deemed ne bis in idem.

Keywords

Characteristics, Ne Bis In Idem, Constitutional Court Procedural Law

Full Text:

PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)

References

Buku

Benton, Lauren, 2004, Law and Colonial Cultures: Legal Regimes in World History, 1400-1900, 2nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bruggink, JJ. H., 2015, Refleksi Tentang Hukum: Pengertian-pengertian Dasar dalam Teori Hukum, Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Burns, Robert P., 1999, A Theory of the Trial, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Cardozo, Benjamin N., 1946, The Nature of the Judicial Process, 13th ed., New Haven: Yale University Press.

Halim, Ridwan A., 1983, Hukum Pidana dalam Tanya Jawab, Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia.

Prasetyo, Teguh, 2010, Hukum Pidana, Depok: Raja Grafindo Persada.

Thomas III, George C., 1998, Double Jeopardy: The History, The Law, New York and London: New York University Press.

Tim Penulis Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi, 2019, Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi, Edited by Fajlurrahman Jurdi, Edisi Revisi, Jakarta: Kepaniteraan dan Sekretariat Jenderal Mahkamah Konstitusi.

Jurnal

Patterson, Richard D., and Michael E Travers. “Literary Analysis and the Unity of Nahum”, Grace Theological Journal, Volume 9, Issue 1, 1988, h. 45–58. https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/gtj/09-1_045.pdf.

Peraturan Perundang-undangan

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana

Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 Tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi Sebagaimana Telah Diubah dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2011 Tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 Tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi, dan Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2020 Tentang Perubahan Ketiga Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 Tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi (Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2003 Nomor 98, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 4316, Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2011 Nomor 70, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5226 dan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2020 Nomor 216, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 6554).

Putusan Pengadilan

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor Nomor 003/PUU-IV/2006.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 69/PUU-X/2012.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 78/PUU-X/2012.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 44/PUU-XI/2013.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 53/PUU-XI/2013.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 25/PUU-XIV/2016.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 36/PUU-XV/2017.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 40/PUU-XV/2017.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 55/PUU-XVII/2019.

Internet

The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, “Code of Justinian”, https://www.britannica.com/topic/code-of-justinian, diunduh 30 November 2020.