Helmi Kasim, Helmi
Unknown Affiliation

Published : 6 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 6 Documents
Search

Kompatibilitas Metode Pembuktian dan Penafsiran Hakim Konstitusi dalam Putusan Pemilukada Kasim, Helmi; Asy’ari, Syukri; Hilipito, Meyrinda R.; Putranto, Rio Tri Juli
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 9, No 4 (2012)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (546.295 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk%x

Abstract

Decision-making in the Settlement of Local Election Dispute at the Constitutional Court is based on the conviction of the justices after examining evidence submitted by the parties. Meanwhile, the law has limited the authority of the Court which is simply to rule on the result of vote count in the local election. Therefore, through interpretation, the Court has created new norms in its decision concerning local election.In some of its decisions, the Court broadened its authority in the settlement of local election dispute which is to include the process of the election. The dictum of the decision does not merely follow what is stated in the law. There is compatibility in the justices’ conviction based on interpretation done by the justices regarding   the authority of the Court in deciding Local Election Dispute and in the choice of dictum of the decision which is different from what has been stated by the law.
Perspektif Konstitusional Kedudukan Negara dan Swasta dalam Pengelolaan Sumber Daya Air Menurut UUD 1945 Kasim, Helmi; Anindyajati, Titis
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 13, No 2 (2016)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (436.147 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk13210

Abstract

This research discusses the constitutional perspective of water resources management and its relation to the position of the state and the private sector in the management of water resources. This research examines the decision of the Constitutional Court in the judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2004 on Water Resources. There are two issues discussed in these studies namely (i) what is the constitutional perspective of water resource management and (ii) what is the position of the state and the private sector in water resources management? This research uses normative law research. The results showed that there are two constitutional perspectives in water resources management which are the perspective of control by the state under Article 33 paragraph (3) and the perspective of Human Rights perspective based on Article 28H of the 1945 Constitution. Based on the perspective of control  by the state, management of water resources should be controlled by the state from upstream to downstream. The state should take control of water resources  and establish distribution channels to meet the needs of the citizens on the water. From a human rights perspective, the state is obliged to protect, promote and fulfill the right  to water.  This obligation cannot be left to the private sector especially in water management based on its primary function. Therefore, the overall water management should be done by the state through the State Owned Enterprises or Regional Owned Enterprises. In fact, the monopoly of water management is a policy option that can be taken by the state. On the other hand, the private sector can take a part to commercialize water based on the use of water in its secondary function for industrial use through licensing mechanism. The study concluded that the state has an obligation to meet the citizens’ rights to water in order to meet the needs of a decent life based on primary functions of water. Secondary functions can be operated by private sectors.
Status Keistimewaan Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta dalam Bingkai Demokrasi Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 (Studi Kasus Pengisian Jabatan Kepala Daerah dan Wakil Kepala Daerah) Laksono, Fajar; Kasim, Helmi; Kurniawan, Nallom; Mardiya, Nuzul Qur’aini; Ramdan, Ajie; Rachmatika, Siswantana Putri
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 8, No 6 (2011)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (336.969 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk%x

Abstract

Status keistimewaan Provinsi DIY dalam kurun waktu sekian lama lebih sering diinterpretasikan sebagai istimewa dalam hal wilayah yang dulunya berbentuk kerajaan, istimewa dalam pemimpin yaitu dipimpin dwi tunggal dari lingkungan Kasultanan dan Pakualaman, dan istimewa dalam sistem pemerintahannya yang hierarkis patrimonial. Apabila dikelompokkan, pemaknaan keistimewaan Provinsi DIY setidaknya terbelah menjadi 2 (dua) yakni pihak yang pro-pemilihan  dan  pro-penetapan.  Penetapan Sri Sultan Hamengku Buwono sebagai Gubernur dan Sri Paku Alam sebagai Wakil Gubernur Provinsi DIY tidak bertentangan dengan prinsip-prinsip demokrasi menurut UUD 1945 karena dalam Pembukaan UUD 1945, para penyusun UUD 1945 sepakat untuk mengadaptasikan bentuk dan model demokrasi yang sesuai dengan budaya dan corak masyarakat Indonesia yakni demokrasi permusyawaratan berdasar kekeluargaan. Artinya, masyarakat DIY berhak bermufakat secara kekeluargaan mengenai mekanisme yang ingin dipraktikkan, sepanjang mekanisme tersebut dipandang demokratis, dalam arti tidak bertentangan dengan gagasan demokrasi permusyawaratan serta tidak mengabaikan hakikat keistimewaan DIY, termasuk melalui mekanisme penetapan. Dalam hal menentukan kepala daerah DIY, para pengubah UUD 1945  tidak memaknai demokrasi hanya melalui mekanisme pemilihan secara langsung oleh rakyat atau oleh DPRD, melainkan membuka mekanisme lain di luar itu sepanjang mekanisme tersebut dianggap demokratis dan mendapatkan payung hukum dari undang- undang.
Memikirkan Kembali Pengawasan Badan Usaha Milik Negara Berdasarkan Business Judgement Rules Kasim, Helmi
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 14, No 2 (2017)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (382.166 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk14210

Abstract

Berdasarkan putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi, keuangan Badan Usaha Milik Negara (BUMN) tetap merupakan keuangan negara sehingga kewenangan negara di bidang pengawasan tetap berlaku. Meskipun demikian, paradigma pengawasan negara dimaksud harus berubah, yakni tidak lagi berdasarkan paradigma pengelolaan keuangan negara dalam penyelenggaraan pemerintahan (government judgement rules), melainkan berdasarkan paradigma usaha (business judgement rules). Tulisan ini mencoba menghadirkan perspektif tertentu tentang bagaimana mengatur prinsip pengawasan khususnya terkait pemeriksaaan pengelolaan dan pertanggungjawaban keuangan negara pada BUMN berdasarkan putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 62/PUU-XI/2013. Dengan melakukan pendekatan yuridis normatif tulisan ini menyimpulkan bahwa pemeriksaan pengelolaan pertanggungjawaban keuangan negara berdasarkan business judgement rules (BJR) harus dinormakan secara tegas dalam Undang-Undang Keuangan Negara dan Undang-Undang terkait lainnya. Prinsip-prinsip BJR dan good corporate governance (GCG) sebagai pedoman pengawasan dan pemeriksaan juga harus diatur secara tegas dan sama baik dalam Undang-Undang Keuangan Negara dan undang-undang terkait serta Undang-Undang Perseroan Terbatas.
Penegasan Peran Negara dalam Pemenuhan Hak Warga Negara Atas Air Kasim, Helmi
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 12, No 2 (2015)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (446.691 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1228

Abstract

This writing analyses access to water not merely as a right but as human  rights. Since the right to water constitues human rights, then constitutionally, the state, mainly the government, is obliged to respect, fulfil and protect that right. In order that the government can perform its obligation to fulfil the right of citizens   to water, the sate should put control of water under the power of the state. Thus, there are two perspectives in fulfilling the rights of citizens to water, human rights perspective and the perspective of state control. From the perspective of human rights, the 1945 Constitution has stipulated the obligation of the state in fulfilling the human rights of citizens including the right to water as stated in Article 28I paragrahp (4). From the perspective of state control over water resources, the 1945 Constitution has also determined constitutional standard as stipulated in Article 33. This concept of state control based on Article 33 has been interpreted by the Constitutional Court in its decisions. Specifically, in the decision concerning the law on water resources, the Court returned control over water to the state. The Court  set some limitations on how to utilize water resources. Private corporations are still allowed to participate in water management with strict conditions. The enhancement of this control by the state over water is intended to guarantee the fulfilment of the right of citizens to water. As an idea, monopoly of the state over water resources might be also be considered just like monopoly of state over electricity.
Penegasan Peran Negara dalam Pemenuhan Hak Warga Negara Atas Air Kasim, Helmi
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 12, No 2 (2015)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (446.691 KB) | DOI: 10.31078/jk1228

Abstract

This writing analyses access to water not merely as a right but as human  rights. Since the right to water constitues human rights, then constitutionally, the state, mainly the government, is obliged to respect, fulfil and protect that right. In order that the government can perform its obligation to fulfil the right of citizens   to water, the sate should put control of water under the power of the state. Thus, there are two perspectives in fulfilling the rights of citizens to water, human rights perspective and the perspective of state control. From the perspective of human rights, the 1945 Constitution has stipulated the obligation of the state in fulfilling the human rights of citizens including the right to water as stated in Article 28I paragrahp (4). From the perspective of state control over water resources, the 1945 Constitution has also determined constitutional standard as stipulated in Article 33. This concept of state control based on Article 33 has been interpreted by the Constitutional Court in its decisions. Specifically, in the decision concerning the law on water resources, the Court returned control over water to the state. The Court  set some limitations on how to utilize water resources. Private corporations are still allowed to participate in water management with strict conditions. The enhancement of this control by the state over water is intended to guarantee the fulfilment of the right of citizens to water. As an idea, monopoly of the state over water resources might be also be considered just like monopoly of state over electricity.