ANALISIS KOMPARATIF URGENSI PENERAPAN CONSTITUTIONAL COMPLAINT DI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI INDONESIA DAN KOREA SELATAN: TANTANGAN DAN PELUANG

Dona Armania Putri, NIM.: 20103040068 (2024) ANALISIS KOMPARATIF URGENSI PENERAPAN CONSTITUTIONAL COMPLAINT DI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI INDONESIA DAN KOREA SELATAN: TANTANGAN DAN PELUANG. Skripsi thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (ANALISIS KOMPARATIF URGENSI PENERAPAN CONSTITUTIONAL COMPLAINT DI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI INDONESIA DAN KOREA SELATAN: TANTANGAN DAN PELUANG) 20103040068_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf - Published Version Download (2MB) | Preview
	Text (ANALISIS KOMPARATIF URGENSI PENERAPAN CONSTITUTIONAL COMPLAINT DI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI INDONESIA DAN KOREA SELATAN: TANTANGAN DAN PELUANG) 20103040068_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (5MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Indonesia, as a legal state, undoubtedly has a constitution as a guide in organizing the state to align with the ideals and objectives on which the Indonesian nation was founded. Therefore, the Constitutional Court is present to safeguard the values embedded in the constitution, ensuring that the governance of the state stays true to the nation's goals and aspirations. The constitution also exists to limit the state's power, preventing arbitrary actions and violations of human rights. The Constitutional Court operates with four authorities and one obligation in carrying out its duties. However, with the evolving times, it is felt that the Constitutional Court's authority is insufficient to protect citizens' basic rights due to the absence of the constitutional complaint authority, which allows citizens to file complaints regarding violations of their rights by government actions or inactions. Considering the data from 2022, which recorded 1,278 cases of human rights violations, there is a need for a state institution to address such violations against citizens resulting from government actions or inactions. This necessitates a comparative analysis of countries that have implemented constitutional complaints to understand the procedural aspects of their implementation. This research utilizes a comparative and normative juridical approach, with data collection conducted through library research. The study's content is qualitative and yields descriptive-analytical data. The findings indicate that South Korea has been implementing the constitutional complaint system since the establishment of its Constitutional Court, and this authority is explicitly outlined in the South Korean constitution. There is an opportunity for Indonesia to implement constitutional complaints by amending the 1945 Constitution to include the authority of the Constitutional Court. However, this is a political inevitability, given the lengthy procedure and the lack of urgent necessity for amendment implementation. Additionally, garnering consensus within the legislative body proves challenging. Two alternatives to implement constitutional complaints without amending the constitution are through judicial interpretation and legislative interpretation.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item