Ratio Legis Pembatasan Kedudukan Hukum bagi Pembentuk Undang-Undang dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang

Dian Agung Wicaksono, Enny Nurbaningsih

Abstract


The discourse on limiting the legislators standing to submit a constitutional review is not an entirely new issue to analyze. However, these things still need to be examined to explore the legal ratio of limitation of the legislator’s standing to submit a constitutional review by the Constitutional Court. This research specifically answers the questions: (a) how are the dynamics of the use of the legislators standing in the constitutional review? (b) what is the legal ratio for limiting legislators standing in the constitutional review? This study uses a normative legal research method by analyzing secondary data in the form of legislation, the Constitutional Court decisions, and literature related to legislators standing to submit the constitutional review. The results of this study indicate that the legal ratio limiting legislators’ standing can be traced through the legal considerations of the Constitutional Court decisions from 2003-2019.

Keywords


Legislators; Legal Ratio; Legal Standing

Full Text:

PDF

References


Buku

Amirudin, and Zainal Asikin. Pengantar Metode Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 2003.

Butt, Simon. The Constitutional Court and Democracy in Indonesia. Leiden: Brill Nijhoff, 2015.

Soerjono Soekanto, and Sri Mamudji. Penelitian Hukum Normatif Suatu Tinjauan Umum. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada, 2007.

Jurnal

Abel, Arthur H. “Burger Court’s Unified Approach to Standing and Its Impact on Congressional Plaintiffs.” Notre Dame Law Review 60, no. 5 (1985): 1194.

Arend, Anthony Clark, and Catherine B. Lotrionte. “Congress Goes to Court: The Past, Present, and Future of Legislator Standing.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 25, no. 1 (2001): 218.

Bisariyadi. “Membedah Doktrin Kerugian Konstitusional.” Jurnal Konstitusi 14, no. 1 (2017): 40.

Dessem, R. Lawrence. “Congressional Standing to Sue: Whose Vote Is This, Anyway?” Notre Dame Law Review 62, no. 1 (1986): 2.

Gohl, William D. “Standing up for Legislators: Reevaluating Legislator Standing in the Wake of Kerr v. Hickenlooper.” Northwestern University Law Review 110, no. 5 (2016): 1274–79.

Jr., Ernest A. Benck. “Standing for State and Federal Legislators.” Santa Clara Law Review 23, no. 3 (1983): 811–12.

Mangum, David G. “Standing Versus Justiciability: Recent Developments in Participatory Suits Brought by Congressional Plaintiffs.” Brigham Young University Law Review, no. 2 (1982): 376.

McGowan, Carl. “Congressmen in Court: The New Plaintiffs.” Georgia Law Review 15, no. 2 (1981): 252–252.

Wagner, Jonathan. “The Justiciability of Congressional-Plaintiff Suits.” Columbia Law Review 82, no. 3 (1982): 528–31.

Weiner, David J. “The New Law of Legislative Standing.” Stanford Law Review 54, no. 1 (2001): 210–12.

Laporan Penelitian

Al-Farisi, Muhammad Salman. “Tinjauan Yuridis Terhadap Legal Standing Pemohon Pengujian Undang-Undang Yang Berstatus Anggota Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Di Mahkamah Konstitusi.” Skripsi Program Studi Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Hasanuddin, 2018.

Pandiangan, Wita Rohana. “Legal Standing Anggota DPR Dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang Di Mahkamah Kostitusi (Studi Terhadap Beberapa Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi).” Skripsi Departemen Hukum Tata Negara Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sumatera Utara, 2017.

Rahmani, Sofia Asri. “Legal Standing Anggota DPR RI Dalam Judicial Review Undang-Undang Terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar 1945: Studi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 20/PUU-XIV/2016.” Skripsi Program Studi Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Syariah dan Hukum UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, 2018.

Internet

Erdianto, Kristian. “MK: Permohonan Uji Materi Setya Novanto Terkait UU KPK Tak Relevan.” Accessed April 5, 2020. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2018/02/21/12114661/mk-permohonan-uji-materi-setya-novanto-terkait-uu-kpk-tak-relevan.

Redaksi Detik. “Tak Terima Dipecat Dari DPR, Lily Wahid Ajukan Judicial Review Ke MK.” Accessed April 5, 2020. https://news.detik.com/berita/d-2199872/tak-terima-dipecat-dari-dpr-lily-wahid-ajukan-judicial-review-ke-mk.

Putusan Pengadilan

Mahkamah Konstitusi. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 020/PUU-V/2007 (2007).

———. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 051-052-059/PUU-VI/2008 (2008).

———. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 023-026/PUU-VIII/2010 (2010).

———. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 071/PUU-IX/2011 (2011).

———. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 092/PUU-X/2012 (2012).

Peraturan Perundang-undangan

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

———. Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi (2003).

———. Undang-Undang Nomor 17 Tahun 2014 tentang Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah, dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah (2014).

———. Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2018 tentang Perubahan Kedua Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 17 Tahun 2014 tentang Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah, dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah (2018).

———. Undang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2019 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2011 tentang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-undangan (2019).




DOI: https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1931

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF view : 0 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.