Post Amendment of Judicial Review in Indonesia: Has Judicial Power Distributed Fairly?

Muhammad Siddiq Armia, Zahlul Pasha Karim, Huwaida Tengku-Armia, Chairul Fahmi, Muhammad Syauqi Bin-Armia, Armiadi Musa
{"title":"Post Amendment of Judicial Review in Indonesia: Has Judicial Power Distributed Fairly?","authors":"Muhammad Siddiq Armia, Zahlul Pasha Karim, Huwaida Tengku-Armia, Chairul Fahmi, Muhammad Syauqi Bin-Armia, Armiadi Musa","doi":"10.15294/jils.v7i2.56335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Distribution of power in Indonesian constitutional system not only occur amongst state organs but also within Indonesian judicial system. The Supreme Court and Constitutional Court share their power to review several regulations. The 1945 Constitution delivers power to review act against constitution for Constitutional Court and to review regulations below an act for the Supreme Court. However, this distribution of power is vulnerable to contradicting each other, with the possibility of having clash of judgment. There is no guarantee that the Supreme Court will fully obey the Constitutional Court judgment. So, the research question needs to be solved such as judicial Review pre-the Amendment of the 1945 Constitution process, and judicial Review Post the Amendment of the Constitution implement, that will be main points of research purposes. Furthermore, the main problem is the distribution power between Constitutional Court and Supreme Court, whether have distributed fairly or not. Another problem after amendment is about disagreement amongst judges. Before amendment, judges were forbidden to show their disagreement clearly in the verdict, but now allowed. This fact has led to public distrust. They have questioned the legitimacy of the verdict having disagreement, whether should be obeyed or be denied.","PeriodicalId":32877,"journal":{"name":"JILS Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JILS Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15294/jils.v7i2.56335","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Distribution of power in Indonesian constitutional system not only occur amongst state organs but also within Indonesian judicial system. The Supreme Court and Constitutional Court share their power to review several regulations. The 1945 Constitution delivers power to review act against constitution for Constitutional Court and to review regulations below an act for the Supreme Court. However, this distribution of power is vulnerable to contradicting each other, with the possibility of having clash of judgment. There is no guarantee that the Supreme Court will fully obey the Constitutional Court judgment. So, the research question needs to be solved such as judicial Review pre-the Amendment of the 1945 Constitution process, and judicial Review Post the Amendment of the Constitution implement, that will be main points of research purposes. Furthermore, the main problem is the distribution power between Constitutional Court and Supreme Court, whether have distributed fairly or not. Another problem after amendment is about disagreement amongst judges. Before amendment, judges were forbidden to show their disagreement clearly in the verdict, but now allowed. This fact has led to public distrust. They have questioned the legitimacy of the verdict having disagreement, whether should be obeyed or be denied.
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
印尼修订后的司法审查制度:司法权分配公平吗?
印尼宪政体制中的权力分配不仅发生在国家机关之间,也发生在司法系统内部。大法院和宪法法院共同拥有审查若干规定的权力。1945年的《宪法》规定,宪法法院有权审查违宪行为,大法院有权审查法案以下的规定。然而,这种权力分配很容易相互矛盾,有可能产生判断冲突。不能保证大法院会完全服从宪法法院的判决。因此,需要解决的研究问题包括1945年宪法修改前的司法审查过程,以及宪法修改实施后的司法审查等,这将是研究的重点。此外,主要问题是宪法法院和大法院之间的权力分配是否公平。修正案后的另一个问题是法官之间的分歧。在修正案之前,法官被禁止在判决中明确表达他们的不同意见,但现在允许了。这一事实引起了公众的不信任。他们质疑有分歧的判决是否合法,是否应该遵守或否认。
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
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Under-Legislation in Electronic Trials and Renewing Criminal Law Enforcement in Indonesia (Comparison with United States) Development of a Restitution Model in Optimizing Legal Protection for Victims of Human Trafficking in Indonesia The Driving Factors for Recidivism of Former Terrorism Convicts in Socio-Legal Perspective Indonesian Travel Policy during the Outbreaks: Vaccination and Quarantine Legal Culture and Policy on Indonesian Air Transportation The Intersection of the Progressive Law Theory and the Self-Declaration Concept of MSEs Halal Certification
×
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