Rechtsidee
Vol 11 No 2 (2023): December
Constitutional Law

Constitutional Inquiry Rights in Evaluating Constitutional Court Decisions: A Case Study of MK Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023
Hak Angket Konstitusi dalam Mengevaluasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi: Studi Kasus Putusan MK No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023

View Article
  • Askari Razak*,
  • Fakhry Amin
Askari Razak
Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Muslim Indonesia, Indonesia *
Fakhry Amin
Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi Enam Enam Kendari, Indonesia

(*) Corresponding Author
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21070/jihr.v12i2.1012


Picture in here are illustration from public domain image or provided by the author, as part of their works
Published December 30, 2023
Keywords
  • Parliamentary Inquiry,
  • Constitutional Court Decision,
  • Legal Analysis,
  • Indonesian Democracy,
  • Oversight Function
How to Cite
Razak, A., & Amin, F. (2023). Constitutional Inquiry Rights in Evaluating Constitutional Court Decisions: A Case Study of MK Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023. Rechtsidee, 11(2), 10.21070/jihr.v12i2.1012. https://doi.org/10.21070/jihr.v12i2.1012

Copyright (c) 2023 Askari Razak, Fakhry Amin (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

 
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

This research focuses on analyzing the construction of the parliamentary inquiry right (hak angket) within the context of the controversial Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi, MK) Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 in Indonesia. The decision, which interprets the age requirement for presidential and vice-presidential candidates, has sparked debates about the potential misuse of MK's authority. The study aims to understand the legal construction of the DPR’s parliamentary inquiry in light of the 1945 Constitution and relevant legislations, and to assess its implications on the oversight function of representative institutions. Employing a normative legal research methodology, the study analyzed legislation, legal concepts, and conducted expert interviews and content analysis. The findings reveal that the parliamentary inquiry, as a constitutional right of the DPR stipulated in Article 20A paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution, is utilized to assess the impact of MK Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 on Indonesia’s democracy and electoral system. The study highlights the need for DPR to observe legal provisions and ensure transparency and accountability in its inquiry process, emphasizing the significance of balancing democratic principles, transparency, and protection of citizens’ political rights in the oversight mechanism.
Highlights:

  • Parliamentary Inquiry and Democracy: Exploration of the DPR's inquiry right in relation to MK's decision, emphasizing its importance for democratic accountability.
  • Legal and Democratic Implications: Focus on the legal boundaries and democratic significance of applying the inquiry to a judicial decision.
  • Transparency and Accountability: Highlighting the need for transparency and accountability in the parliamentary inquiry process.

Keywords: Parliamentary Inquiry, Constitutional Court Decision, Legal Analysis, Indonesian Democracy, Oversight Function

View Article

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. A. T. Wicaksono, A. A. Nur, S. Mar’ah, and E. Huroiroh, “Praktik Inkostitusional Pemberhentian Hakim Konstitusi pada Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia,” Verfassung J. Huk. Tata Negara, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–24, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.30762/vjhtn.v2i1.217.
  2. M. Asro, “Kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945,” Adliya J. Huk. Dan Kemanus., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 151–164, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.15575/adliya.v11i2.4857.
  3. T. Sasmitha, H. Budiawan, and Sukayadi, “Laporan Penelitian Pemaknaan Hak Menguasai Negara oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi (Kajian terhadap Putusan MK No. 35/PUU-X/2012; Putusan MK No. 50/PUUX/2012; dan Putusan MK No. 3/PUU-VIII/2010),” Yogyakarta: STPN Press, 2014.
  4. M. M. Meidiana, “Integrasi Pengujian Peraturan Perundang-Undangan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi,” Undang J. Huk., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 381–408, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.22437/ujh.2.2.381-408.
  5. J. Riskiyono, “Partisipasi Masyarakat dalam Pembentukan Perundang-Undangan untuk Mewujudkan Kesejahteraan,” Aspir. J. Masal. Sos., vol. 6, no. 2, 2015.
  6. P. M. Marzuki, “Metode Penelitian Hukum,” Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, 2014.
  7. Sekjen KY RI, “Etika dan Budaya Hukum dalam Peradilan,” Jakarta: Sekretariat Jenderal Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia, 2017.
  8. C. B. Florencia, “Anggota Legislatif Adalah DPR Dan Presiden,” J. Huk. Adigama, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1837–1861, 2020.
  9. S. R. Putra and H. Widodo, “Analisis Yuridis Putusan MK Nomor 16/PUU-XVI/2018 Terkait Perluasan Kewenangan MKD dan Hak Pemanggilan Paksa DPR,” Novum J. Huk., vol. 7, no. 3, 2020.
  10. S. Sumartini and J. Arifin, “Fungsi Hak Angket Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat untuk Melakukan Penyelidikan Terhadap Pelaksanaan Undang-Undang,” Yustitia, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 23–44, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.31943/yustitia.v6i1.97.
  11. Suparto, “Dinamika & Problematika Hukum Dari Hak Angket DPR Terhadap KPK Sampai Ke Penyelesaian Sengketa Batas Wilayah Melalui Pengujian Peraturan Perundang-Undangan,” Jakarta: Bina Karya (BIKA), 2022.
  12. S. Isra, “Peran Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Penguatan Hak Asasi Manusia di Indonesia,” J. Konstitusi, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 409, May 2016, doi: 10.31078/jk1131.
  13. B. Besar, “Pelaksanaan dan Penegakkan Hak Asasi Manusia dan Demokrasi di Indonesia,” Humaniora, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 201, Apr. 2011, doi: 10.21512/humaniora.v2i1.2971.
  14. M. Susanto, “Integritas,” vol. 4, no. 2, p. 29, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.32697/integritas.v4i2.294.
  15. T. P. H. A. M. Konstitusi, “Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi,” Sekertariat Jendral Mahkamah Konstitusi, 2010.
  16. M. Susanto, “Hak Angket Sebagai Fungsi Pengawasan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat,” J. Yudisial, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 385, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.29123/jy.v11i3.326.
  17. M. Fauzan, T. N. Yacub, E. R. Gumilar, N. Safitri, and M. J. Sitanggang, “Rekonstruksi Kewenangan Komisi Yudisial Terhadap Pengusulan Hakim Konstitusi sebagai Upaya Peningkatan Netralitas Hakim Konstitusi di Indonesia (Studi Kasus Pengubahan Putusan Hakim Konstitusi M. Guntur Hamzah),” J. Esensi Huk., vol. 5, no. 2, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.35586/jsh.v5i2.234.
  18. D. A. Mujiburohman, “Pengantar Hukum Tata Negara,” Sleman: STPN Press, 2017.
  19. Pusat Studi Konstitusi (PUSaKO) Fakultas Hukum Universitas Andalas, “Konstitusionalitas dan Kerangka Hukum Penyelenggaraan Pemilu dan Pemilihan Serentak Tahun 2024,” Padang: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Andalas, 2022.
  20. D. M. Aritonang, “Peranan dan Problematika Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) dalam Menjalankan Fungsi dan Kewenangannya,” J. Ilmu Adm., vol. X, no. 3, 2013.
  21. M. Wibowo, “Makna ‘Kebijakan Hukum Terbuka’ dalam Putusan Pengujian Undang-Undang di Mahkamah Konstitusi,” Malang: Universitas Brawijaya, 2017.