Konsistensi Pembuatan Norma Hukum dengan Doktrin Judicial Activism dalam Putusan Judicial Review

Bagus Surya Prabowo, Wiryanto Wiryanto

Abstract


This study intends to explain the consistency of the Constitutional Court (MK) in making new legal norms by using the doctrine of judicial activism and to explain the factors that underlie the consistency of the Constitutional Court in making new legal norms through normative juridical research by explaining the principles, principles, and analysis of interrelated decisions. This study concludes that the Constitutional Court is inconsistent because it only grants and makes new legal norms in the Constitutional Court Decision Number 5/PUU-V/2007. Meanwhile, in the Constitutional Court's Decision Number 53/PUU-XV/2017, the Constitutional Court refused to make a new norm even though the two cases created discrimination and limited public participation in politics. The inconsistency factors include: 1) jurisprudence factors, 2) the application cannot convince the majority of the judges of the Constitutional Court, and 3) the paradigm factor of judges.


Keywords


Judicial Activism; Judicial Review; New Legal Norm; Open Legal Policy; Positive Legislature

Full Text:

PDF

References


Buku

Asshiddiqie, Jimly. Hukum Acara Pengujian Undang – Undang. Jakarta: Konstitusi Press, 2006.

Fishkin, James S. When the People Speak. London: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Hoesein, Zainal Arifin. Kekuasaan Kehakiman di Indonesia. Jakarta: Imperium, 2013.

Machmudin, Dudu Duswara. Pengantar Ilmu Hukum. Bandung: PT Refika Aditama, 2000.

Manan, Bagir Manan. Menegakkan Hukum Suatu Pencarian. Jakarta: Asosiasi Advokat Indonesia, 2009.

Martitah. Mahkamah Konstitusi Dari Negative Legislature ke Positive Legislature?. Jakarta: Konstitusi Press, 2013.

MD, Mahfud. Konstitusi dan Hukum dalam Perdebatan Isu. Jakarta: Rajawali Press, 2009.

Muluk, Khairul. Menggugat Partisipasi Publik dalam Pemerintahan Daerah. Malang: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Dokumentasi FIA – Unibraw, 2007.

Palguna, I Dewa Gede. Pengaduan Konstitusional (Constitutional Complaint) Upaya Hukum terhadap Pelanggaran Hak – Hak Konstitusional Warga Negara. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2013.

Palguna, I Dewa Gede. Mahkamah Konstitusi & Dinamika Politik Hukum di Indonesia. Depok: Rajawali Press, 2020.

Sastropoetro, Santoso. Partisipasi, Komunikasi, Persuasi, dan Disiplin dalam Pembangunan Nasional. Bandung: Alumni, 2000.

Tanya, Bernard L., Yoan N. Simanjuntak, Markus Y. Hage. Teori Hukum: Strategi Tertib Manusia Lintas Ruang dan Generasi. Yogyakarta: Genta Publishing. 2019.

Jurnal

Amarini, Indriati. “Implementation of Judicial Activism in Judge’s Decision.” Jurnal Hukum Dan Peradilan 8, no. 1 (2019). http://dx.doi.org/10.25216/jhp.8.1.2019.21-38.

Ansori, Lutfil. “Telaah Terhadap Presidential Threshold dalam Pemilu Serentak 2019.” Jurnal Yuridis 4, no. 1, (Juni 2017).

Benuf, Kornelius & Azhar, Muhammad. “Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Sebagai Instrumen Mengurai Permasalahan Hukum Kontemporer.” Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 7, no. 1 (August 7, 2020). https://doi.org/10.14710/gk.7.1.20-33.

Faiz, Pan Mohammad. “Dimensi Judicial Activism Dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi.” Jurnal Konstitusi 13, no. 2 (2016). https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1328.

Garavito, César Rodríguez. “Beyond the Courtroom: The Impact of Judicial Activism on Socioeconomic Rights in Latin America.” Texas Law Review, 89, No. 7, (2011).

Goffar, Abdul. “Problematika Presidential Threshold: Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dan Pengalaman di Negara Lain.” Jurnal Konstitusi 15, no. 3 (September 2018). https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1532.

Kmiec, Keenan D. “The Origin and Current Meanings of ‘Judicial Activism’.” California Law Review 92, no. 5 (Oktober 2004). https://doi.org/10.2307/3481421.

Mukhtarrija, Muhammad, I Gusti Ayu Ketut Rachmi Handayani dan Agus Riwanto. “Inefektifitas Pengaturan Presidential Threshold dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2017 tentang Pemilihan Umum.” Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum 24, no. 4 (Oktober 2017).

Prabowo, Bagus Surya. “Menggagas Judicial Activism dalam Putusan Presidential Threshold di Mahkamah Konstitusi”, Jurnal Konstitusi 19, no. 1 (Maret 2022). https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1914.

Wibisana, Andri Gunawan. “Menulis di Jurnal Hukum: Gagasan, Struktur dan Gaya.” Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan, 49, no. 2 (2019). https://doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol49.no2.2014.

Young, Ernest A. “Judicial Activism and Conservative Politics.” University of Colorado Law Review 73, no. 4 (September 2002).

Konstitusi dan Undang-Undang

Indonesia. Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 (1945).

___________. Undang-Undang Nomor 39 Tahun 1999 tentang Hak Asasi Manusia, LN No. 165, TLN No. 3886.

___________. Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintah Daerah, LN No. 125, TLN No. 4437.

___________. Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2006 tentang Pemerintahan Aceh, LN No. 62, TLN No. 4633.

___________. Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman, LN No. 157, TLN No. 5076.

___________. Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2011 tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2008 tentang Partai Politik, LN No. 8, TLN No. 5189.

__________. Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2017 tentang Pemilihan Umum, LN No. 182, TLN No. 6109.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi

Mahkamah Konstitusi. Putusan MK No. 006/PUU-III/2005 (2005).

Mahkamah Konstitusi. Putusan MK No. 5/PUU-V/2007 (2007).

Mahkamah Konstitusi. Putusan MK No. 53/PUU-XV/2017 (2017).

Mahkamah Konstitusi. Putusan MK No. 74/PUU-XVII/2020 (2020).




DOI: https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1925

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 172 times
PDF view : 54 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.