Study of constitutional court decisions cancelling all norms in the law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/ljih.v29i2.15434Keywords:
Heart article, Judicial Review, Constitutional Court DecisionAbstract
This article is the result of research on the heart article in the 3 Constitutional Court Decisions which canceled the entire contents of the law, namely the Constitutional Court Decision Number 001-021-022/PUU-I/2003 which canceled Law Number 20 of 2002 concerning Electricity, Constitutional Court Decision 006/PUU-IV/2006 which canceled Law 27 of 2004 concerning the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Constitutional Court Decisions 11-14-21-126 and 136/PUU-VII/2009 which canceled the Law Number 9 of 2009 concerning Legal Education Entities, and the Constitutional Court Decision 85/PUU-XI/2013 which canceled Law Number 7 of 2004 concerning Water Resources. The term 'heart article' is the term coined by the Constitutional Court and used as the main reason for canceling the entire contents of the law. Unfortunately, in these decisions, the Constitutional Court did not elaborate further on the concept and characteristics of an article categorized as the heart article. Departing from this issue, this research aims to find out what are the concepts and characteristics of the "heart article" of a law that was completely canceled by the Constitutional Court? To help answer this question, this research employed a normative method intended to trace all legal materials, both of the Constitutional Court decisions, statutory regulations, to the literature supporting the research. The importance of this research is to give meaning to the concept of the heart article, which, in the development of legal science, is still rarely discussed. Moreover, it can serve as a reference for petitioners to conduct the judicial review and to identify whether the article being tested is the heart article.
Downloads
References
Adonara, F. F. (2015). Prinsip Kebebasan Hakim dalam Memutus Perkara Sebagai Amanat Konstitusi Principles of Fredom of Justice in Decidene The Case as a Constitutional Mandate. Jurnal Konstitusi, 12 (1), 1–20.
Atmadjaja, D. (2012). Putusan Ultra Petita Mahkamah Konstitusi. Jurnal Konstitusi, 115610.
Brewer-Carías, A. R. (2010). Constitutional Courts as “Positive Legislators” in the United States. American Journal of Comparative Law, 58(1), 479–504. https://doi.org/10.5131/ajcl.2009.0018
Canon, B. C. (1983)., Defining the Dimensions of Judicial Activism. Judicature, 66(6).
Chandranegara, I. S. (2016). Purifikasi Konstitusional Sumber Daya Air Indonesia (Constitutional Purification on Water Law). Jurnal Rechts Vinding Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, 5(3), 359–379. http://www.sinarharapan.co.id/berita/0310/27/ipt01.html.
Faiz, P. M. (2016). Dimensi Judicial Activism dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Jurnal Konstitusi, 13(2), 406. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1328
Harjanti, B. M. & S. D. (2015). Memahami Konstitusi: Makna dan Aktualisasi. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Lailam, T. (2018). Penataan Kelembagaan Pengujian Norma Hukum di Indonesia. Jurnal Konstitusi, 15(1), 206. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk15110
Mamudјi, S. S. & S. (1985). Penelitian Hukum Nоrmatif. Raјawali Pers.
Marzuki, P. M. (2009). Penelitian Hukum (ke-5). Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Puspitasari, S., & Nindyaningrum, U. (2015). Implikasi Putusan Makhamah Konstitusi Nomor 85/Puu-Xi/2013 Terhadap Sistem Penyediaan Air Minum. Jurnal Penelitian Hukum, 2(1), 48.
R. Herlambang Perdana Wiratraman, D. (2017). Laporan Penelitian: Dampak dan Implementasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang memutuskan Pembatalan Undang-undang no. 27 tahun 2004 Tentang Komisi Kebenaran dan Rekonsiliasi Terhadap mekanisme hukum Dan Akses Keadilan Korban Bagi Penyelesaian Pelanggaran HAM
Richard H. Fallon, J. (2008). The Core Of An Uneasy Case For Judicial Review. Harvard Law Review, 121(7).
Suroso, F. L. (2018). Potret Relasi MK– Legislator, Konfrontatif atau Kooperatif? Genta Publishing.
Susanto, O. S. & A. F. (2015). Teori Hukum, Mengingat, Mengumpulkan dan Membuka Kembali. Refika Aditama.
Thomas J. Carrier. (2000). The White House, the Capitol, and the Supreme Court: Historic Self-Guided Tours. Arcadia Publishing.
Veri Junaidi, et, al. (2019). Membaca 16 Tahun Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK): Data Uji Materi Undang-Undang terhadap UUD 1945 (2003-2019.
Walter F. Murphy, C. Herman Pritchett, J. K. (2005). Courts, Judges, and Politics: An Introduction to The Judicial procces. Mc Graw Hill.
Widarto, J. (2016). Penerapan Asas Putusan Hakim Harus Dianggap Benar (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 97/puu-xi/2013). Lex Jurnalica, 13(1).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Febriansyah Ramadhan, Ilham Dwi Rafiqi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.