{"title":"2007年,根据上议院决议,第18条对众议院拟议的人权法作出判决","authors":"Xavier Nugraha, Maulia Madina, Ulfa Septian Dika","doi":"10.26623/HUMANI.V9I1.1444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Artikel ini merupakan kajian konseptual terkait usulan DPR sebagai langkah awal dalam pembentukan Pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc. Dalam penjelasan Pasal 43 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Nomor 26 Tahun 2000 Tentang Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia, dijelaskan bahwa usulan DPR tersebut didasarkan pada dugaan telah terjadinya pelanggaran HAM berat yang locus dan tempus delictinya terjadi sebelum diundangkannya Undang-Undang Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia. Frasa dugaan dalam penjelasan tersebut menimbulkan problematika karena melakukan dugaan tersebut adalah fungsi penyelidikan sesuai Pasal 1 angka 5 Undang-Undang Nomor 26 Tahun 2000. DPR seolah menjalankan fungsi untuk melakukan penyelidikan dalam yang seharusnya merupakan kewenangan Komnas HAM sesuai Pasal 18 Undang-Undang Nomor 26 Tahun 2000. Hal ini tumpang tindih kewenangan DPR dan Komnas HAM. Pasca Putusan MK Nomor 18/PUU/V/2007, DPR wajib untuk mengajukan usulan pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc , setalah adanya dugaan pelanggaran HAM berat sebelum diundangkannya Undang-Undang Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia oleh Komnas HAM This article is a conceptual study related to the House of Representatives proposal as an initial step in the establishment of the Ad Hoc Human Rights Court. In the explanation of Article 43 paragraph (2) of Law Number 26 Year 2000 concerning the Human Rights Court, it was explained that the House of Representatives proposal was based on the alleged occurrence of gross human rights violations that had locus and temporal delays before the promulgation of the Human Rights Court Law. The alleged phrase in the explanation raises a problem because making such an assumption is a function of investigation in accordance with Article 1 number 5 of Act Number 26 of 2000. The House of Representatives seems to carry out a function to conduct investigations which should be the authority of the National Human Rights Commission in accordance with Article 18 of Law Number 26 Year 2000. This authoriy overlaps the authority of the DPR and the National Human Rights Commission. After the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18 / PUU / V / 2007, the House of Representatives was obliged to submit an Ad Hoc Human Rights court proposal, following the alleged gross human rights violations before the promulgation of the Human Rights Court Law by the National Commission of Human Rights","PeriodicalId":32023,"journal":{"name":"Humani Jurnal Hukum dan Masyarakat Madani","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Akibat Hukum Berlakunya Putusan MK Nomor 18/PUU/V/2007 Terhadap Usulan DPR Dalam Pembentukan Pengadilan Ham Ad Hoc\",\"authors\":\"Xavier Nugraha, Maulia Madina, Ulfa Septian Dika\",\"doi\":\"10.26623/HUMANI.V9I1.1444\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Artikel ini merupakan kajian konseptual terkait usulan DPR sebagai langkah awal dalam pembentukan Pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc. Dalam penjelasan Pasal 43 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Nomor 26 Tahun 2000 Tentang Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia, dijelaskan bahwa usulan DPR tersebut didasarkan pada dugaan telah terjadinya pelanggaran HAM berat yang locus dan tempus delictinya terjadi sebelum diundangkannya Undang-Undang Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia. Frasa dugaan dalam penjelasan tersebut menimbulkan problematika karena melakukan dugaan tersebut adalah fungsi penyelidikan sesuai Pasal 1 angka 5 Undang-Undang Nomor 26 Tahun 2000. DPR seolah menjalankan fungsi untuk melakukan penyelidikan dalam yang seharusnya merupakan kewenangan Komnas HAM sesuai Pasal 18 Undang-Undang Nomor 26 Tahun 2000. Hal ini tumpang tindih kewenangan DPR dan Komnas HAM. Pasca Putusan MK Nomor 18/PUU/V/2007, DPR wajib untuk mengajukan usulan pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc , setalah adanya dugaan pelanggaran HAM berat sebelum diundangkannya Undang-Undang Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia oleh Komnas HAM This article is a conceptual study related to the House of Representatives proposal as an initial step in the establishment of the Ad Hoc Human Rights Court. In the explanation of Article 43 paragraph (2) of Law Number 26 Year 2000 concerning the Human Rights Court, it was explained that the House of Representatives proposal was based on the alleged occurrence of gross human rights violations that had locus and temporal delays before the promulgation of the Human Rights Court Law. The alleged phrase in the explanation raises a problem because making such an assumption is a function of investigation in accordance with Article 1 number 5 of Act Number 26 of 2000. The House of Representatives seems to carry out a function to conduct investigations which should be the authority of the National Human Rights Commission in accordance with Article 18 of Law Number 26 Year 2000. This authoriy overlaps the authority of the DPR and the National Human Rights Commission. After the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18 / PUU / V / 2007, the House of Representatives was obliged to submit an Ad Hoc Human Rights court proposal, following the alleged gross human rights violations before the promulgation of the Human Rights Court Law by the National Commission of Human Rights\",\"PeriodicalId\":32023,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Humani Jurnal Hukum dan Masyarakat Madani\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Humani Jurnal Hukum dan Masyarakat Madani\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26623/HUMANI.V9I1.1444\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Humani Jurnal Hukum dan Masyarakat Madani","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26623/HUMANI.V9I1.1444","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
摘要
这篇文章是对众议院拟议的概念审查,认为这是建立人权法的第一步。在《2000年人权法》第43条(2)中,有人解释说,众议院的提议是基于在《人权法》通过之前发生的严重侵犯人权行为的指控。根据2000年第1条第5条第26条的调查结果,这个所谓的短语引起了问题。根据《2000年26号法案》第18条,国会似乎在进行调查。这是议会权力和联邦责任的重叠。MK 18号判决后强制PUU / V / 2007,众议院提出人权法庭临时提案之前,存在涉嫌严重侵犯人权的罪行之后diundangkannya人权法庭法律是由含的警署这文章a conceptual研究相关《House of Representatives体制》美国提案的最初一步在临时人权法庭。《解释》文章43号法律的第(2)段26年2000 concerning人权法院网、是、讲解的《House of Representatives提案是改编自名知情occurrence of格罗斯Human Rights violations那有轨迹和颞delays promulgation》之前,人权法庭的法律。《意外经历》的反响引发了一个问题,因为对《2000年第26卷第1卷第5卷的调查起到了作用。众议院的代表似乎起到了作用,以掩盖调查的作用,这应该是国家人权委员会对2000年第18年的法律事务的授权。这超越了众议院和全国人权委员会的授权。《移交法庭决定之后的18 PUU / V / 2007号,《House of Representatives)是obliged to submit临时人权法庭的建议,跟踪《名知情格罗斯Human Rights violations promulgation》之前,人权法庭法律:《National Commission of Human Rights)
Akibat Hukum Berlakunya Putusan MK Nomor 18/PUU/V/2007 Terhadap Usulan DPR Dalam Pembentukan Pengadilan Ham Ad Hoc
Artikel ini merupakan kajian konseptual terkait usulan DPR sebagai langkah awal dalam pembentukan Pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc. Dalam penjelasan Pasal 43 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Nomor 26 Tahun 2000 Tentang Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia, dijelaskan bahwa usulan DPR tersebut didasarkan pada dugaan telah terjadinya pelanggaran HAM berat yang locus dan tempus delictinya terjadi sebelum diundangkannya Undang-Undang Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia. Frasa dugaan dalam penjelasan tersebut menimbulkan problematika karena melakukan dugaan tersebut adalah fungsi penyelidikan sesuai Pasal 1 angka 5 Undang-Undang Nomor 26 Tahun 2000. DPR seolah menjalankan fungsi untuk melakukan penyelidikan dalam yang seharusnya merupakan kewenangan Komnas HAM sesuai Pasal 18 Undang-Undang Nomor 26 Tahun 2000. Hal ini tumpang tindih kewenangan DPR dan Komnas HAM. Pasca Putusan MK Nomor 18/PUU/V/2007, DPR wajib untuk mengajukan usulan pengadilan HAM Ad Hoc , setalah adanya dugaan pelanggaran HAM berat sebelum diundangkannya Undang-Undang Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia oleh Komnas HAM This article is a conceptual study related to the House of Representatives proposal as an initial step in the establishment of the Ad Hoc Human Rights Court. In the explanation of Article 43 paragraph (2) of Law Number 26 Year 2000 concerning the Human Rights Court, it was explained that the House of Representatives proposal was based on the alleged occurrence of gross human rights violations that had locus and temporal delays before the promulgation of the Human Rights Court Law. The alleged phrase in the explanation raises a problem because making such an assumption is a function of investigation in accordance with Article 1 number 5 of Act Number 26 of 2000. The House of Representatives seems to carry out a function to conduct investigations which should be the authority of the National Human Rights Commission in accordance with Article 18 of Law Number 26 Year 2000. This authoriy overlaps the authority of the DPR and the National Human Rights Commission. After the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18 / PUU / V / 2007, the House of Representatives was obliged to submit an Ad Hoc Human Rights court proposal, following the alleged gross human rights violations before the promulgation of the Human Rights Court Law by the National Commission of Human Rights