This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Konstitusi
Enrico Simanjuntak, Enrico
Unknown Affiliation

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Pengujian Perda dan Perdes Pasca Perubahan UU Pemda dan UU Desa Simanjuntak, Enrico
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 13, No 3 (2016)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (351.815 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1338

Abstract

The development of contemporary public law (both in the field of constitutional law and administrative law) in Indonesia was marked by the strengthening of the internal settlement administration assertion as a means of testing the legal norms of both abstract and concrete. With variations, in a legal dispute concerning the norms of concrete, these developments containing fragmentation models for partly governs how the advanced mechanism in the judiciary after taken administrative effort (eg, Law Administration) and some not at all set up (eg, Law Reform State Civil). Some of the latest legislation select general-abstract norm testing internally without linking them with the possibility of testing judicially by the judiciary, among others: Law on Local Government and Law Village. In both the legislation does not regulate how the mechanism of local regulation (Perda) or village laws (Perdes) canceled by the governor or regent / mayor, whether they can be tested back to the judiciary through judicial review mechanism. This paper intends to discuss how the implementation of the authority of judicial review by Supreme Court after the enactment Law of Local Goverment or Law of Village which is not regulated by the latest legal mechanism to test regional law in the form of regulation (local laws), including Perdes (Village Laws), whereas previous products or similar laws regulate otherwise.
Peran Yurisprudensi dalam Sistem Hukum di Indonesia Simanjuntak, Enrico
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 16, No 1 (2019)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (451.629 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1615

Abstract

Karakteristik sistem hukum common law adalah hukum yang berorientasi kepada kasus (case-law), sedangkan sistem civil law, hukum berorientasi kepada undang-undang (codified-law). Namun peraturan perundang-undangan sebagai basis legalitas hukum dalam tradisi Rechtstaats, memiliki keterbatasan tersendiri. Peraturan perundang-undangan tidak pernah mengatur secara lengkap dan detail bagaimana pemenuhan aturan hukum dalam setiap peristiwa hukum, oleh karenanya yurisprudensi lah yang akan melengkapinya. Selain untuk mengisi kekosongan hukum, yurisprudensi merupakan instrumen hukum dalam rangka menjaga kepastian hukum. Tulisan ini berusaha mengkaji kedudukan yurisprudensi dikaitkan dengan tugas dan fungsi MK sebagai pengawal konstitusi, bukan sebagai penegak undang-undang. Metode analisis yang digunakan adalah studi pustaka dengan pendekatan perbandingan. Kesimpulan yang didapat dalam penelitian ini adalah bahwa yurisprudensi merupakan salah satu sumber hukum yang penting dalam tradisi civil law. Setiap diskursus tentang yurisprudensi dalam tradisi civil law mengisyaratkan bahwa tradisi civil law mengakui hukum selain yang tertuang dalam bentuk undang-undang, juga terdapat hukum yang bersumber dari hukum hakim (judge made law) (rechtstersrecht) yang lebih dikenal dengan nama yurisprudensi (jurisprudentierecht).The characteristics of the common law legal system are case-law, whereas the civil law system, the law is codified-law. However, legislation as the basis of legal legality in the tradition of Rechtstaats, has its own limitations. Legislation never regulates in full and detail how compliance with the laws in every legal circumtances, therefore it is jurisprudence that will complement it. In addition to filling a legal vacuum, jurisprudence is a key legal instrument in order to maintain legal certainty. This paper seeks to examine the position of jurisprudence associated with the duties and functions of the Constitutional Court as a guardian of the constitution, not merely as statute enforcement. The analytical method used is a literature study with a comparative approach. The conclusion obtained in this study is that jurisprudence is an important source of law in the civil law tradition. Any discourse on jurisprudence in the civil law tradition implies that the civil law tradition recognizes law other than those contained in statutes, there is also a law that comes from judge made law (rechtstersrecht) better known as jurisprudence (jurisprudentierecht).