Metode Tafsir Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Pengujian Konstitusional Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja

Dodi Haryono

Abstract


The use of the constitutional interpretation method by the judges of the Indonesian Constitutional Court (MK-RI) in their decision’s consideration (ratio decidendi) determine the decisions quality, therefore it must be chosen appropriately. In the context of Indonesian rule of law, the use of constitutional interpretation method should be implemented holistically, integrative, and using a dynamic approach, that must be harmonized with the Pancasila. This article is aimed to explain and analyze the use of constitutional interpretation method in the Constitutional Court Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 regarding the Formal Constitutional Review of Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation, as well as its theoretical implications. This article also proposes a new approach for constitutional interpretation method which is expected to strengthen the normative legitimacy and justification of the MK-RI decisions in the future. The method of analyses used in this article is the legal normative analyses with a conceptual approach. Finally, this article concludes that the method of constitutional interpretation in the Constitutional Court Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 is considered as eclecticism. Using the new approach, the decision has also fulfilled the principles of holistic, integrative and dynamic constitutional interpretation based on Pancasila. For this reason, the Constitutional Court Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 deserves to be used as one of the Landmark Decisions at the Indonesian Constitutional Court. However, the eclecticism approach wich is used by Indonesian Constitutional Court to interpret the constitution still needs to be developed in order to increase the normative of legitimacy and justification of decisions quality. In addition, that approach must also be linked to Pancasila both as a rechtsidee and staatsfundamentalnorm of the Indonesian state.

Keywords


Metode Penafsiran Konstitusi; Mahkamah Konstitusi; Pengujian Konstitusional; Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja

Full Text:

PDF

References


Buku

Ali, Achmad, 2017, Menguak Tabir Hukum, Cet. II, Jakarta: Kencana.

Arinanto, Satya dan Dodi Haryono, 2021, “Penafsiran Konstitusi: Prakteknya di Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia,” dalam buku Percikan Pemikiran Makara Merah: Dari FH UI Untuk Indonesia, ed. Heru Susetyo at.al., Depok: Badan Penerbit Fakultas Hukum UI.

Asshiddiqie, Jimly, 2006, Pengantar Ilmu Hukum Tata Negara: Jilid I, Jakarta: Konstitusi Press, 2006.

_______, 2020, Hukum Acara Pengujian Undang-Undang, Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2010.

Barak, Aharon, 2005, Purposive Interpretation in Law, Princeton-New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Barber, Sotirios A. and James E. Fleming, 2007, Constitutional Interpretation: The Basic Questions, Madison Avenue-New York: Oxford University Press.

Bobbitt, Philip, 1984. Constitutional Fate: Theory of The Constitution, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bruggink, Johannes Josephus Henricus, 1993, Rechtsreflecties: Grondbegrippen Uit de Rechtstheorie, Deventer: Kluwer.

Ducat, Craig R., 2004, Constitutional Interperation, California: Wordsworth Classic.

Frohlich, Johanna, 2017, Justification of The Methods of Constitutional Interpretation, Disertasi Pazmany Peter Catholic University.

Garvey, John H., et al., 2004, Modern Constitutional Theory: A Reader, West: Thomson.

Gultom, Lodewijk, 2007, Eksistensi Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Struktur Ketatanegaraan di Indonesia: Suatu Kajian dari Aspek Tugas dan Wewenangnya, Bandung: Utomo.

Hadjon, Philipus M. dan Tatiek Sri Djatmiati, 2005, Argumentasi Hukum, Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.

Haryono, Dodi, 2021, Penafsiran Konstitusi Berdasarkan Pancasila dengan Pendekatan Purposif Aharon Barak: Relevansinya dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 di Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Periode 2015-2018, Disertasi Doktoral Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta.

Martitah, 2013, Mahkamah Konstitusi dari Negative Legislature ke Positive Legislature, Jakarta: KONpress.

Mertokusumo, Sudikno, 2006, Penemuan Hukum: Sebuah Pengantar, Yogyakarta: Liberty.

Penyusun Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi, 2010, Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi, Cet. 1, Jakarta: Sekretariat Jenderal dan Kepaniteraan MK-RI.

Pontier, J.A., 2001, Penemuan Hukum [Rechtsvinding], diterjemahkan oleh B. Arief Sidharta, Bandung: Laboratorium Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Katolik Parahyangan.

Prakoso, Abintoro, 2016, Penemuan Hukum: Sistem, Metode, Aliran dan Prosedur dalam Menemukan Hukum, Yogyakarta: LaksBang PRESSindo, 2016.

Pusat Bahasa Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, 2005, Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia, Edisi Ketiga-Cet.III, Jakarta: Balai Pustaka.

Suseno, Franz Magnis, 1992, Filsafat Sebagai Ilmu Kritis, Jakarta; Kanisius.

Jurnal

Barnett, Randy E., 1999, “An Originalism for Non-Originalists,” Loyola Law Review, Volume 45.

Berman, Mitchell N., 1999, “Constitutional Interpretation: Non-originalism,” Philosophy Compass, Volume 6, Issue 6, 2011.

Bendor, Ariel L. dan Zeev Segal, 2011, “The Judicial Discretion of Justice Aharon Barak”, Tulsa Law Review, Volume 47.

Chen, Albert H.Y., 2000, “The Interpretation of the Basic Law: Common Law and Mainland Chinese Perspectives,” Hong Kong Law Journal, Volume 30.

Fallon, Jr., Richard H., 1999, “How to Choose a Constitutional Theory,” California Law Review, Volume 87.

Feldman, Stephen M., 2014 “Constitutional Interpretation and History: New Originalism or Eclecticism?,” BYU Journal of Public Law, Volume 28.

Fathorrahman, 2021 “Pengaturan dan Implikasi Pengujian Formil Undang-Undang di Mahkamah Konstitusi,” HUKMY: Jurnal Hukum, Volume 1, Issue 2.

Griffin, Stephen M., 1994, “Pluralism in Constitutional Interpretation,” Texas Law Review, Volume 72.

Kissam, Philip C., 2005, “Constitutional Theory and Ideological Factors: Three Nineteenth-Century Justices,” University of Kansas Law Review, Volume 54.

Rahman, Faiz dan Dian Agung Wicaksono, 2016, “Eksistensi dan Karakteristik Putusan Bersyarat Mahkamah Konstitusi,” Jurnal Konstitusi, Volume 13, Issue 2.

Rahman, Faiz, 2020, “Anomali Penerapan Klausul Bersyarat dalam Putusan Pengujian Undang Undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar,” Jurnal Konstitusi, Volume 17, Issue 1.

Solum, Lawrence B., 2013, “Originalism and Constitutional Construction,” Fordham Law Review, Volume 82.

Siregar, Fritz Edward, 2015, “Indonesia Constitutional Court Constitutional Interpretation Methodology (2003-2008),” Constitutional Review, Volume 1.

Wibowo, Mardian, 2016, “Menakar Konstitusionalitas sebuah Kebijakan Hukum Terbuka dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang”, Jurnal Konstitusi, Volume 12, Issue 2.

Internet

Budiman, Anwar, “Polemik Putusan MK tentang UU Cipta Kerja”, dalam https://www.tribunnews.com/tribunners/ 2021/12/01/ polemik-putusan-mk-tentang-uu-cipta-kerja?page=2 diunduh 6 Desember 2021.

Priatmojo, Dedy dan Edwin Firdaus, “Denny Indrayana Ungkap 4 Ambiguitas Putusan MK terkait UU Cipta Kerja” dalam https://www.viva.co.id/berita/nasional/1426804-denny-indrayana-ungkap-4-ambiguitas-putusan-mk-terkait-uu-cipta-kerja diunduh 6 Desember 2021

Saifudin, Z., “Telaah Kritis Putusan MK tentang UU Cipta Kerja”, dalam https://petisi.co/telaah-kritis-putusan-mk-tentang-uu-cipta-kerja/ diunduh 6 Desember 2021.

Saputra, Andi, "Ahli Hukum: 2 Tahun Waktu Perbaikan, Bukan Menerapkan UU Ciptaker" dalam https://news.detik.com/berita/d-5828023/ ahli-hukum-2-tahun-waktu-perbaikan-bukan-menerapkan-uu-ciptaker diunduh 6 Desember 2021




DOI: https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1843

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 1017 times
PDF view : 600 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.