Hakim Pengganti Mahkamah Konstitusi
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59059/mandub.v4i2.3248Keywords:
Binding Force, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Court Decisions, Judicial Review, Legal ForceAbstract
Article 47 of the Constitutional Court Law stipulates that a Constitutional Court decision has permanent legal force upon its pronouncement in a plenary session open to the public. This assertion raises the question of why legal remedies are not possible to correct a Constitutional Court decision, should an error occur. To achieve legal certainty, will the erroneous decision be enforceable indefinitely? The research question is: What is the rationale underlying the granting of permanent legal force to a Constitutional Court decision upon its pronouncement in a plenary session open to the public? This research employs normative legal research, employing statutory, conceptual, historical, and comparative approaches. The legal materials used are primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The legal materials were collected through document study. The legal materials were analyzed using descriptive and analytical techniques. The results of the study show that, the rationale underlying the granting of the permanent legal force of the Constitutional Court's decision since after it has been pronounced in a public plenary session is because the case submitted to the Constitutional Court is a case related to state administration so that it requires a quick decision and is bound by time limits so as not to disrupt the continuity of other state administration agendas. The possibility of a judicial review of the Constitutional Court's decision, viewed from a normative perspective, is not possible because Article 47 of the Constitutional Court Law states that the Constitutional Court's decision is permanent since it is pronounced in a public plenary session, and is further emphasized in the explanation of Article 10 number (1) that it is permanent, meaning that no legal action can be taken. furthermore in the Regulation of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 06/PMK/2005 concerning Guidelines for Proceedings in Cases of Judicial Review. There is no term for judicial review.
References
Asshiddiqie, J. (2005). Konstitusi dan konstitusionalisme Indonesia. Konstitusi Press.
Asshiddiqie, J. (2006). Pengantar ilmu hukum tata negara (Jilid II). Sekretariat Jenderal dan Kepaniteraan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia.
Huda, N. (2014). Hukum tata negara Indonesia. Rajawali Pers.
Laksono Soeroso, F. (2014). Aspek keadilan dalam sifat final putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Jurnal Konstitusi, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1114
Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. (2005). Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Nomor 06/PMK/2005 tentang pedoman beracara dalam perkara pengujian undang-undang.
Marzuki, P. M. (2017). Penelitian hukum (Edisi revisi). Kencana.
Mertokusumo, S. (2009). Penemuan hukum: Sebuah pengantar. Liberty.
Republik Indonesia. (1945). Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.
Republik Indonesia. (2003). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2003 Nomor 98; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 4316.
Republik Indonesia. (2009). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang kekuasaan kehakiman. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2009 Nomor 157; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5076.
Republik Indonesia. (2011). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 2011 tentang perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2011 Nomor 70; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5226.
Republik Indonesia. (2020). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 7 Tahun 2020 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2020 Nomor 216.
Setiawan, A., et al. (2021). Kekuatan mengikat putusan pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi terhadap putusan pengujian peraturan perundang-undangan oleh Mahkamah Agung. Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.54629/jli.v18i1.796
Soekanto, S. (2012). Penelitian hukum normatif: Suatu tinjauan singkat. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Soemantri, S. (2006). Prosedur dan sistem perubahan konstitusi. Alumni.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mandub : Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
