<![CDATA[Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 46/PUU-XIV/2016 yang menolak perluasan makna zina yang ada dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana menjadi topik yang ramai diperdebatkan. Sebagian masyarakat berpendapat bahwa seharusnya Mahkamah Konstitusi berani melakukan terobosan hukum dalam isu yang sangat penting tersebut. Namun, Hakim Mahkamah Konstitusi berpendapat perluasan makna zina tersebut bukan ranah kewenangan mereka. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji lebih jauh argumentasi hukum (ratio decidendi) putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang bersifat open legal policy dan bagaimana implikasinya terhadap pembentukan peraturan perundang-undangan di Indonesia. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kepustakaan dengan pendekatan undang-undang dan studi kasus terhadap beberapa putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang mengandung argumentasi open legal policy. Secara konseptual penelitian ini juga akan membahas bagaimana implikasi putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang mengandung open legal policy tersebut terhadap sistem legislasi nasional. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pertama, konsepsi open legal policy dalam putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi belum memiliki batasan yang jelas sehingga pengertian positive legislator dan negative legislator sering dikacaukan dalam praktik pembentukan dan pengujian undang-undang. Kedua, putusan yang bersifat open legal policy tersebut juga menunjukkan bahwa di antara hakim Mahkamah Konstitusi telah terjadi tarik menarik penggunaan paradigma judicial activism dan judicial restraints sehingga menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum di tengah masyarakat. Penelitian ini merekemomendasikan perlunya kajian yang lebih mendalam tentang disain open legal policy dalam putusan Mahkamah Konsitusi dan sistem legislasi nasional Indonesia.The Constitutional Court Decision No. 46/PUU/XIV/2016 which rejected the petition of petitioners to broaden the meaning of zina (fornication) in the Criminal Code of Indonesia has been becoming an interesting issue to be discussed. Some argue that the Constitutional Court must use its authority to conduct a break-through in responding the crucial legal issue. On the other hand, the Court asserted that widening the meaning of zina in the Criminal Code of Indonesia is not its authority. The research aims at discussing further the ratio decidendi of the Constitutional Court Decision which contains the element of open legal policy and its implication to national legislation system. The research is a normative legal research which uses statute approach and case law approach. The result of research shows that firstly, the concept of open legal policy in the Constitutional Court decisions does not have a clear limitation which implies uncertainty of its implementation in the Court decisions and the national legislation system. Secondly, the Decision of the Constitutional Court with open legal policy also shows that on one hand, there is a trend of using judicial activism among the constitutional judges. On the other hand, some constitutional judges also use judicial restraint approach as their reasons which results uncertainty of law in Court decision. The research recommends that there should be a further study on design model of open legal policy in the Constitutional Court decisions and its implication to national legislation system.]]>
