Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 30/Puu-Xvi/2018 and Supreme Court Decision No. 65p/Hum/2018 Concerning the Prohibition of Concurrent Positions for Regional Representative Council Candidates (DPD)
This study aims to examine the differences between the Constitutional Court's decision and the Supreme Court's decision regarding the prohibition of concurrent positions as candidates for members of DPD, as well as the legal ramifications of these differences. This research employs the no...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Muhammadiyah Buton
2023-06-01
|
| Series: | Jurnal Hukum Volkgeist |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.jurnal-umbuton.ac.id/index.php/Volkgeist/article/view/3100 |
| _version_ | 1797769223222591488 |
|---|---|
| author | Riswan Rais Syarif Sultan Alwan Rudhi Achsoni |
| author_facet | Riswan Rais Syarif Sultan Alwan Rudhi Achsoni |
| author_sort | Riswan Rais Syarif |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
This study aims to examine the differences between the Constitutional Court's decision and the Supreme Court's decision regarding the prohibition of concurrent positions as candidates for members of DPD, as well as the legal ramifications of these differences. This research employs the normative legal research approach, which refers to legal research that refers to written regulations or other legal materials. Disparity between the Constitutional Court Decision and the Supreme Court is the different time for enforcing the ban on candidates for DPD members from political party officials, according to the findings of this study. The Constitutional Court stated that it has been in effect since the 2019 election, however the Supreme Court stated since after the 2019 election. This disparity or difference may be caused by several factors, including: the Constitutional Court's and the Supreme Court's different authorities when examining a statutory regulation; the Constitutional Court's and the Supreme Court's use of different touchstones when examining a statutory regulation; and the judges of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court's differing perspectives when analyzing cases. The absence of legal certainty and the violation of citizens' constitutional rights are the legal consequences of the gap between the two judgements.
|
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T21:05:49Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-32cc22dd136544589149e6543c89a2d4 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2528-360X 2621-6159 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T21:05:49Z |
| publishDate | 2023-06-01 |
| publisher | Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Muhammadiyah Buton |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Jurnal Hukum Volkgeist |
| spelling | doaj.art-32cc22dd136544589149e6543c89a2d42023-07-30T12:41:30ZengFakultas Hukum, Universitas Muhammadiyah ButonJurnal Hukum Volkgeist2528-360X2621-61592023-06-017210.35326/volkgeist.v7i2.3100Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 30/Puu-Xvi/2018 and Supreme Court Decision No. 65p/Hum/2018 Concerning the Prohibition of Concurrent Positions for Regional Representative Council Candidates (DPD)Riswan Rais Syarif0Sultan Alwan1Rudhi Achsoni2Universitas Khairun TernateUniversitas Khairun TernateUniversitas Khairun Ternate This study aims to examine the differences between the Constitutional Court's decision and the Supreme Court's decision regarding the prohibition of concurrent positions as candidates for members of DPD, as well as the legal ramifications of these differences. This research employs the normative legal research approach, which refers to legal research that refers to written regulations or other legal materials. Disparity between the Constitutional Court Decision and the Supreme Court is the different time for enforcing the ban on candidates for DPD members from political party officials, according to the findings of this study. The Constitutional Court stated that it has been in effect since the 2019 election, however the Supreme Court stated since after the 2019 election. This disparity or difference may be caused by several factors, including: the Constitutional Court's and the Supreme Court's different authorities when examining a statutory regulation; the Constitutional Court's and the Supreme Court's use of different touchstones when examining a statutory regulation; and the judges of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court's differing perspectives when analyzing cases. The absence of legal certainty and the violation of citizens' constitutional rights are the legal consequences of the gap between the two judgements. https://www.jurnal-umbuton.ac.id/index.php/Volkgeist/article/view/3100Verdict AnalysisSupreme CourtConstitutional CourtDouble job |
| spellingShingle | Riswan Rais Syarif Sultan Alwan Rudhi Achsoni Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 30/Puu-Xvi/2018 and Supreme Court Decision No. 65p/Hum/2018 Concerning the Prohibition of Concurrent Positions for Regional Representative Council Candidates (DPD) Jurnal Hukum Volkgeist Verdict Analysis Supreme Court Constitutional Court Double job |
| title | Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 30/Puu-Xvi/2018 and Supreme Court Decision No. 65p/Hum/2018 Concerning the Prohibition of Concurrent Positions for Regional Representative Council Candidates (DPD) |
| title_full | Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 30/Puu-Xvi/2018 and Supreme Court Decision No. 65p/Hum/2018 Concerning the Prohibition of Concurrent Positions for Regional Representative Council Candidates (DPD) |
| title_fullStr | Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 30/Puu-Xvi/2018 and Supreme Court Decision No. 65p/Hum/2018 Concerning the Prohibition of Concurrent Positions for Regional Representative Council Candidates (DPD) |
| title_full_unstemmed | Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 30/Puu-Xvi/2018 and Supreme Court Decision No. 65p/Hum/2018 Concerning the Prohibition of Concurrent Positions for Regional Representative Council Candidates (DPD) |
| title_short | Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 30/Puu-Xvi/2018 and Supreme Court Decision No. 65p/Hum/2018 Concerning the Prohibition of Concurrent Positions for Regional Representative Council Candidates (DPD) |
| title_sort | analysis of constitutional court decision no 30 puu xvi 2018 and supreme court decision no 65p hum 2018 concerning the prohibition of concurrent positions for regional representative council candidates dpd |
| topic | Verdict Analysis Supreme Court Constitutional Court Double job |
| url | https://www.jurnal-umbuton.ac.id/index.php/Volkgeist/article/view/3100 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT riswanraissyarif analysisofconstitutionalcourtdecisionno30puuxvi2018andsupremecourtdecisionno65phum2018concerningtheprohibitionofconcurrentpositionsforregionalrepresentativecouncilcandidatesdpd AT sultanalwan analysisofconstitutionalcourtdecisionno30puuxvi2018andsupremecourtdecisionno65phum2018concerningtheprohibitionofconcurrentpositionsforregionalrepresentativecouncilcandidatesdpd AT rudhiachsoni analysisofconstitutionalcourtdecisionno30puuxvi2018andsupremecourtdecisionno65phum2018concerningtheprohibitionofconcurrentpositionsforregionalrepresentativecouncilcandidatesdpd |