Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2019 - 2024
2.338
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Masalah-Masalah Hukum Veritas et Justitia Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Jurnal Konstitusi Mimbar Hukum - Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada Jurnal Konstitusi Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Yuridika Mimbar Hukum Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan
Titon Slamet Kurnia
Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana
Humanities Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Other

Published : 23 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 23 Documents
Search

 1   2   3 
Assessment of Elements of Abuse of Authority (Detournement De Pouvoir) Based on the Decision of the Constitutional Court: Penilaian Unsur Penyalahgunaan Wewenang (Detournement De Pouvoir) Berdasarkan Putusan Mahkamah konstitusi Titon Slamet Kurnia
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol. 20 No. 1 (2023)
Publisher : Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31078/jk2016

Abstract

Detournement de pouvoir was regulated in administrative and criminal law. However, the assessment of it was often confused. Therefore, the Constitutional Court through Decision 25/PUU-XIV/2016 provides a line of demarcation in assessing the element of Detournement de pouvoir that must be handled under administrative and criminal law. This article tries to explain the ratio decidendie of the constitutional court through a series of identifications of Detournement de pouvoir. This article uses a statutory approach and presents two main findings; First, the assessment of detournement de pouvoir must be understood based on tort of two field of law. Second, abuse of authority is included as tort in administrative law as long as it relates dwaling of authority, procedures/conditions and substance of the exercise of authority, while abuse of authority can be included as tort in criminal law as long as it contains of dwal badrog, namely bribery, coercion and deception.
RECALL ASWANTO: TERTUTUPNYA RUANG DISAGREEMENT ANTARA PEMBENTUK UNDANG-UNDANG DAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI Titon Slamet Kurnia
Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Vol. 7 No. 2 (2023): Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum
Publisher : Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24246/jrh.2023.v7.i2.p143 - 162

Abstract

This article discusses the recall directed to Justice Aswanto of the Constitutional Court during his tenure by the House of Representatives (DPR). The DPR recalls Justice Aswanto due to its disagreement with his judicial performance. According to the law, the Constitutional Court Justices may only be removed from office during his/her tenure through the Ethical Council of the Constitutional Court. This article argues that the recall is inconsistent with the principle of security of tenure and, therefore, contradicts the principle of judicial independence. Unfortunately, this issue is not the main problem. The primary issue is that the legislature has no room to disagree with the Constitutional Court's interpretation in reviewing the constitutionality of legislation. This issue arises because the Constitution, UUD 1945, allocates the finality of the constitutional review mechanism in the judiciary. In solving the issue, this article refers to the Canadian model of constitutional review. The concept of the Canadian model is a judicial review with legislative finality.
SEBUAH KERANGKA TEORETIS HUBUNGAN INSTITUSIONAL BERBASIS KONSTITUSIONALISME Kurnia, Titon Slamet
Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan Vol. 50, No. 2
Publisher : UI Scholars Hub

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

This article discusses legal issue pertaining to institutional relationship between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court in case of constitutional interpretation, particularly the bindingness of the Constitutional Court’s opinion over the Supreme Court. Responding the issue, this article conveys departmentalist view, and rejects judicial supremacist view within the Constitutional Court in prescribing the constitutional interpretation authority. In line with departmentalism, this article argues that the Supreme Court should be given authority in constitutional interpretation, concurrent with the Constitutional Court. It is further argued that constitutional interpretation should be viewed as constitutional discourse in which the Supreme Court should be allowed to participate within its ratione materiae jurisdiction.
Co-Authors Abd. Rasyid Syamsuri Arie Siswanto Ninon Melatyugra Umbu Rauta