The judicialisation of discrimination in the Indonesian constitutional court

Mohammad Ibrahim
{"title":"The judicialisation of discrimination in the Indonesian constitutional court","authors":"Mohammad Ibrahim","doi":"10.1177/13582291221094923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Following the post-Soeharto constitutional reform from 1999 to 2002, the Indonesian Constitutional Court was established with powers, inter alia, to review the constitutionality of national legislation. The constitutional amendments also incorporated a constitutional Bill of Rights, which includes the right to be free from discrimination on any ground and the right to protection against discrimination under Article 28I(2) and the right to equality before the law under Article 28D(1). However, the Constitution does not specify an enumerated list of grounds against which discrimination is prohibited. This article examines a body of constitutional jurisprudence in Indonesia, an Asian civil law country with no formal system of precedent. It seeks to determine the extent to which the Indonesian Constitutional Court has protected the citizens' fundamental rights of equality and against discrimination. Through describing and analysing three court decisions on the principles of equality and non-discrimination, this article argues that the Indonesian Constitutional Court, in its early years of operation, took these principles seriously. Nevertheless, in its later decisions, the Court departed, albeit not explicitly, from its earlier ruling by relying on ‘the belief in One God’ and ‘the religious values consideration’ under Articles 29(1) and 28J of the Constitution to restrict the fundamental rights of equality and non-discrimination. Consequently, the Court has unjustifiably held that discrimination is not prohibited insofar as it is in accord with religious orthodoxy.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221094923","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Following the post-Soeharto constitutional reform from 1999 to 2002, the Indonesian Constitutional Court was established with powers, inter alia, to review the constitutionality of national legislation. The constitutional amendments also incorporated a constitutional Bill of Rights, which includes the right to be free from discrimination on any ground and the right to protection against discrimination under Article 28I(2) and the right to equality before the law under Article 28D(1). However, the Constitution does not specify an enumerated list of grounds against which discrimination is prohibited. This article examines a body of constitutional jurisprudence in Indonesia, an Asian civil law country with no formal system of precedent. It seeks to determine the extent to which the Indonesian Constitutional Court has protected the citizens' fundamental rights of equality and against discrimination. Through describing and analysing three court decisions on the principles of equality and non-discrimination, this article argues that the Indonesian Constitutional Court, in its early years of operation, took these principles seriously. Nevertheless, in its later decisions, the Court departed, albeit not explicitly, from its earlier ruling by relying on ‘the belief in One God’ and ‘the religious values consideration’ under Articles 29(1) and 28J of the Constitution to restrict the fundamental rights of equality and non-discrimination. Consequently, the Court has unjustifiably held that discrimination is not prohibited insofar as it is in accord with religious orthodoxy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
印尼宪法法院对歧视的司法化
继1999年至2002年苏哈托后的宪法改革之后,印尼宪法法院成立,其权力包括审查国家立法的合宪性。宪法修正案还纳入了《宪法权利法案》,其中包括不受任何理由歧视的权利,第28条第1款第2项规定的免受歧视的权利,以及第28条第d款第1项规定的法律面前人人平等的权利。但是,《宪法》没有具体列举禁止歧视的理由。本文考察了印度尼西亚这个没有正式先例制度的亚洲大陆法系国家的宪法学体系。它试图确定印度尼西亚宪法法院在多大程度上保护了公民平等和不受歧视的基本权利。通过描述和分析法院关于平等和不歧视原则的三项判决,本文认为,印度尼西亚宪法法院在其运作的最初几年认真对待这些原则。然而,在后来的判决中,最高法院依靠宪法第29(1)条和第28J条规定的“对一个上帝的信仰”和“宗教价值考虑”来限制平等和不歧视的基本权利,尽管不是明确地偏离了早先的裁决。因此,法院不合理地认为,只要符合宗教正统,歧视就不被禁止。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊最新文献
Intersectional discrimination and EU law: Time to revisit Parris Editorial - September 2024 The prohibition of discrimination and the workers’ right to maternity or paternity leave in light of the drafting history of Article 40 of the Constitution of Uganda and sections 56 and 57 of the Employment Act On the margins of refuge: Queer Syrian refugees and the politics of belonging and mobility in post-2019 Lebanon Legal status of the self-employed person in the field of social protection in Ukraine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1