PETITA: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum dan Syariah (PJKIHdS)
Vol 8 No 2 (2023)

PROPORTIONALITY ANALYSIS IN COMPETING RIGHTS CASES: A MODEL FROM THE GERMAN FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

Tanto Lailam (Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, Indonesia)
Putri Anggia (Universität Autonoma de Barcelona, Spain)
Nita Andrianti (Goethe-Universität Frankfurt Am Main, Germany)



Article Info

Publish Date
01 Nov 2023

Abstract

The research focused on the proportionality analysis (proportionality principle) as a legal reasoning method to decide competing rights cases in the German Federal Constitutional Court (GFCC) or Bundesverfassungsgericht. Normative legal research uses statutory, legal concept, and case approaches. It is prioritized secondary data. Proportionality is the ultimate rule of law, global constitutionalism value, and the benchmark for constitutional judges to review conflicts between individual rights and state interests. Hence, an analysis model for measuring quarrels of competence between the European Union and Germany. It is four stages of assessment analysis: legitimate aims, suitable, necessary, and balancing (strict sense). The result of the research saw that it was a constitutional reasoning model in landmark decision cases in 2020-2022, namely the European Central Bank asset case, the climate change case, the Election of a Vice-President of the Bundestag case, and the Bavarian Constitution Protection Act case. Based on these case reviews, it is well applied, systemized, structured, and comprehensive in each case. However, not all stages are used in competing rights analysis, especially the balancing test as the last analysis in proportionality. Abstrak: Penelitian ini memfokuskan pada doktrin proporsionalitas dalam kasus competing rights (hak yang bersaing) di Mahkamah Konstitusi Federal Jerman. Penalitian hukum normatif ini menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konsep hukum, dan kasas dengan mengutamakan data sekunder. Doktrin proporsionalitas merupakan “the ultimate rule of law” and “global constitutionalism” yang menjadi tolok ukur hakim konstitusi dalam menilai konflik hak individu dengan kepentingan negara, bahkan sebagai model analisis untuk mengukur benturan kompetensi antara Uni Eropa dengan Jerman. Analisis ini melalui empat tahapan penilaian, yaitu: analisis tujuan yang sah dalam pembentukan hukum, kebutuhan hukum, perlunya kebijakan untuk mencapai tujuan, dan keseimbangan dalam hukum. Hasil temuan menunjukkan bahwa analisis proporsional digunakan sebagai model argumentasi hukum dalam kasus yang menjadi perhatian publik pada tahun 2020-2022, yaitu: kasus Bank Central Eropa, kasus perubahan iklim, kasus perlindungan data pribadi di Bavaria, dan pemilihan Wakil Presiden di Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Jerman. Berdasarkan telaah kasus tersebut di atas, analisis proporsionalitas diterapkan secara baik, tersistem, terstruktur, dan komprehensif dalam setiap kasus. Namun tidak semua tahapan digunakan dalam melakukan penilaian, terutama uji keseimbangan sebagai batu uji terakhir dalam doktrin proporsionalitas. Kata Kunci: Proporsionalitas, Mahkamah Konstitusi, Hak Yang Bersaing, Jerman

Copyrights © 2023






Journal Info

Abbrev

petita

Publisher

Subject

Religion Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Description

PETITA journal has aimed to deliver a multi-disciplinary forum for the discussion of thoughts and information among professionals concerned with the boundary of law and sharia, and will not accept articles that are outside of PETITA’s aims and scope. There is a growing awareness of the need for ...