Constitutional Court Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 In the Dynamic Quo Vadis of Indonesian Law Rechtsstate of Machtsstate
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59108/ilre.v2i1.58Keywords:
Constitutional Court, Democracy, Machtstate, RechtsstateAbstract
The birth of the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) in adjudicating case Number: 90/PUU-XXI/2023 resulted in suspicion from many parties towards the President as the decider of the Constitutional Court's decision considering that the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court is the President's brother-in-law or there were indications and/or suspicions that the Constitutional Court was intervened by the Presidential institution, and culminated in the formation of the Constitutional Court Honorary Council (MKMK). The Constitutional Court Judge's decision can be categorised as a decision that has the character of a Rechtsstate (rule of law) or actually confirms the Constitutional Court's decision that has the characteristics of a Machtstate (state of power) and the impact (Social, Political and Institutional Credibility) of the Constitutional Court's Decision on the Independence and Professionalism of the Constitutional Court Judges institutionally. This research uses normative juridical methods using secondary data in the form of literature studies. The aim of this research is to analyse the decisions of Judges and drug consumers as well as the Impact (Social, Political and Institutional Credibility) of Constitutional Court Decisions on the institutional Independence and Professionalism of Constitutional Court Judges. The research results show that the Constitutional Court Decision NO. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 is not in line with the third principle of the rule of law/Rechtsstaat, but the Constitutional Court's decision can be seen as a decision that has the dimension of state power (Machtstate).
References
Agustin, D. T., Iswanto, B., & Syamsi, N. (2022). Analysis of Judges’ Decision on Witness Divorce Evidence in Donggala Religious Court. International Journal of Contemporary Islamic Education, 4(2), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.31969/alq.v28i2.1146
BBC News Indonesia. (2023). Putusan MK ‘pintu masuk’ Gibran jadi cawapres Prabowo, siapa yang diuntungkan dan dirugikan dalam Pilpres 2024? Bbc.Com.
Belia, B. (2023). MK Disebut Mahkamah Keluarga, Anwar Usman: Keluarga Bangsa Indonesia. Detik News.
Bunga, M. (2021). Modernisasi Negara Dalam Konteks Supremasi Hukum. Jurnal Al-Himayah, 5(2), 98–108. https://journal.iaingorontalo.ac.id/index.php/ah/article/view/2478
Chandranegara, I. S. (2021). Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi. Sinar Grafika.
El-Kassas, W. S., Salama, C. R., Rafea, A. A., & Mohamed, H. K. (2021). Automatic Text Summarization: A Comprehensive Survey. Expert System with Aplication, 165, 189–195. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113679
Fianni, A. (2022). Menelaah 5 Macam Pendekatan dalam Penelitian Hukum Artikel ini telah tayang di Katadata.co.id dengan judul Menelaah 5 Macam Pendekatan dalam Penelitian Hukum. Katadata.Co.Id.
H. Gunarto, A. M., & Gulo, Y. (2022). Implementation of Full Systemic Land Registration for Certificate of Land in The City Of Tebing Tinggi (Study at the Office of the National Land Agency of Tebing Tinggi City). IJCS: International Journal of Community Service, 1(2), 78–92. https://doi.org/10.55299/ijcs.v1i2.310
Hutajulu, M. (2023). Peneliti SMRC: Putusan MK Bermasalah Bisa Berdampak ke Prabowo-Gibran. Detik News.
Jessee, S., Malhotra, N., & Sen, M. (2022). A decade-long longitudinal survey shows that the Supreme Court is now much more conservative than the public. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 119(24), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2120284119
Juanda, O., & Juanda. (2023). The Ideal Law State Concept in Indonesia; The Reality and The Solution. Journal of Law, Politic and Humanities, 3(2), 251–262. https://doi.org/10.38035/jlph.v3i2.172
Kamran, M., & Putri, M. A. (2023). Political Form and Sovereignty of the Republic of Indonesia: State of Law or State of Power. Jurnal Tana Mana, 4(1), 352–358. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.33648/jtm.v4i1.373
Maulidya, G. Z., Rahmawati, S. N., Rahmawati, V., & Mardany, A. F. (2023). Ratio Decide on Decisions, Types of Decisions and Legal Remedies Against Decisions that Have Permanent Legal Force in View from the Perspective of Criminal Procedure Law in Indonesia. HUKMY : Jurnal Hukum, 3(1), 211–230. https://doi.org/10.35316/hukmy.2023.v3i1.211-230
Nurdzakiyyah, A., Nurwagita, E. D., & Maharani, G. P. (2022). Penghapusan Pasal 22 Undang-undang Mahkamah Konstitusi Sebagai Upaya Memperkuat Independensi Hakim Konstitusi. Jurnal Studia Legalia : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 3(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.1987.tb01467.x
Pramudya, S. V., Brilliant, G., & Ramadhan, R. D. (2024). Persoalan Etis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Mengenai Batas Usia Calon Presiden Terhadap Masa Depan Politik Indonesia. Nusantara: Jurnal Pendidikan, Seni, Sains Dan Sosial Humanioral, 1(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.11111/nusantara.xxxxxxx
Prasetiawan, E., Syawali, H., & Supriatna, R. (2022). Penerapan Sifat Aktif Mediator dalam Mediasi Perkara Perdata di Pengadilan dalam Mewujudkan Perdamaian Para Pihak Ditinjau dari Perma Nomor 1 Tahun 2016 Tentang Prosedur Mediasi di Pengadilan. Bandung Conference Series: Law Studies, 2(1), 907–913. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.29313/bcsls.v2i1.2232
Putra, A. (2018). Dualisme Pengujian Peraturan Perundang-Undangan. Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia, 15(2), 69–79. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.54629/jli.v15i2.172
Rumyantsev, M. B., Turanin, V. Y., Romashov, R. A., Sumenkova V, M., & Batova V, O. (2020). Forming and Development of Law-Making Principles System and Its Meaning for Legal Enforcement of Suitable Legal Regulation Model. Turismo-Estudos E Praticas, 2, 1–8. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Vladislav-Turanin/publication/347560334_FORMING_AND_DEVELOPMENT_OF_LAW-MAKING_PRINCIPLES_SYSTEM_AND_ITS_MEANING_FOR_LEGAL_ENFORCEMENT_OF_SUITABLE_LEGAL_REGULATION_MODEL/links/5fe1e20145851553a0df929d/FORMING-AND-DEVELOPMENT-OF-LAW-MAKING-PRINCIPLES-SYSTEM-AND-ITS-MEANING-FOR-LEGAL-ENFORCEMENT-OF-SUITABLE-LEGAL-REGULATION-MODEL.pdf
Saifulloh, P. P. A. (2022). Penafsiran Pembentuk Undang-Undang Membentuk Kebijakan Hukum Terbuka Presidential Threshold Dalam Undang-Undang Pemilihan Umum Yang Bersumber Dari Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Jurnal Rechts Vinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, 11(1), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v11i1.867
Sholahuddin Al-Fatih. (2023). Perkembangan Metode Penelitian Hukum di Indonesia. UMM Press.
Simanjuntan, L. F., Rusmiati, E., & Atmaja, B. A. (2023). Dissenting Opinion by Judges in The Process of Making Decisions on Corruption Cases as a Form of Judge Freedom. Corruptio, 4(2), 117–126. https://doi.org/DOI: https://doi.org/10.31289/mercatoria.v16i1.8915
Sunarso, S. (2022). Viktimologi dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Sinar Grafika.
Sutrisno, Puluhulawa, F., & Tijow, L. M. (2020). Penerapan Asas Keadilan, Kepastian Hukum dan Kemanfaatan dalam Putusan Hakim Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Gorontalo Law Review, 3(2), 168–187. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.32662/golrev.v3i2.987
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Intellectual Law Review (ILRE)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
-
The journal holds the copyright for each article published with work licensed simultaneously under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License which allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the authorship and early publication of the work in this journal.
-
Authors must agree to the copyright transfer agreement by checking the Copyright Notice column at the initial stage when submitting the article.
