AUTHORITY OF SETTLEMENT OF VILLAGE HEAD ELECTION POST CONSTITUTIONAL COURT DECISION

Abstract

Disputes Election of village heads based on Law 6 of 2014 concerning Villages is resolved by the Regent as stipulated in Article 37 paragraph (6) states that the regent is obliged to settle disputes resulting from the election of a village head within 30 (thirty) days. Then further regulated at the district level, local regulations have been implemented that are adjusted to the local wisdom of each region. However, there is a Constitutional Court Decision Number 137 / PUU-XIII / 2015 and Number 56 / PUU-XIV / 2016 which states that the central government does not have the authority to cancel provincial regulations, so it has logical consequences that there are regional regulations that contradict the above regulations. canceled so that the settlement of the dispute over the election of the village head was originally resolved by the Executive agency (regent) then it can turn to the Judiciary institution, namely in the State Administrative Court. This decision does not necessarily solve the problem of constitutionality of the authority to examine the product of regional law which incidentally is under the law. Juridical implications for the settlement of dispute over the results of the election after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 56 PUU /-XIV / 2016, the regent who made the Regional Regulation or Regulations of the regent, as well as the settlement authority. This shows the position of the regent as the executive has a dual role as a judicial institution. So the normative decision of the regent is not final, and can still be appealed to the District Court and the PTUN where the dispute occurred.