DISKRESI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI SEBAGAI INSTRUMEN THE GUARDIAN OF THE CONSTITUTION PERSPEKTIF KEKUASAAN KEHAKIMAN

Iswandi, S.H, NIM.: 18203010019 (2020) DISKRESI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI SEBAGAI INSTRUMEN THE GUARDIAN OF THE CONSTITUTION PERSPEKTIF KEKUASAAN KEHAKIMAN. Masters thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (DISKRESI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI SEBAGAI INSTRUMEN THE GUARDIAN OF THE CONSTITUTION PERSPEKTIF KEKUASAAN KEHAKIMAN) 18203010019_ISWANDI_BAB I_BAB V_DAFTAR PUSTAKA_CURRICULUM VITAE.pdf - Published Version Download (4MB) | Preview
	Text (DISKRESI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI SEBAGAI INSTRUMEN THE GUARDIAN OF THE CONSTITUTION PERSPEKTIF KEKUASAAN KEHAKIMAN) 18203010019_ISWANDI_BAB II_BAB III_BAB IV.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (6MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Article 10 of act number 8 of 2011 emphasizes the Constitutional Court verdict to acquire a permanent legal force directly after its pronouncement as well as the final and binding. However, there arose a constitutional problem that the Constitutional Court verdict is still being implemented by the State Official, and by the act number 15 of 2019 on the Formulation of Legislation, the amendment of the law is included as a result of constitutional judge verdict. Such disobedience is a form of the constitution emergency as the supremacy of constitution and the Constitutional Court as the guardian of the constitution is optimally implemented. The purpose of this research is to reaffirm the verdict as the supremacy in guarding the supremacy of constitution. This research uses the library research method or normative legal research and also uses the descriptive analysis which displays a description of the strengthening and expanding of the authority of the Constitutional Court. The research approach is using the juridical or statute approach and normative approach. The theoretical basis uses in this research is the supremacy of law and judicial authority (Al-Sultha Al-Qadha‟iyah). The results of this research, so far the Constitutional Court based on the prevailing provisions have not maximally answered the problematics in the constitutional state if disobedience occurs to the verdict issued. The reason is that the Constitutional Court does not have a system such as executive and legislative branches, meanwhile the rules still unable to accommodate the state's disobedience to the constitutional judicature verdict. Thus, to streamline and strengthen the escort of the constitution then the author formulates the concept of discretion as a policy step by the Constitutional Court to reaffirm the verdicts that are not adhered to by the state institution.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item