.DAILAMI, MOH (2008) TINJAUAN YURIDIS NORMATIF KEWENANGAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI UNTUK MENAFSIRKAN UNDANG-UNDANG DASAR DAN UNDANG-UNDANG DALAM JUDICIAL REVIEW UNDANG-UNDANG TERHADAP UNDANG-UNDANG DASAR NEGARA REPUBLIK INDONEISA TAHUN 1945. Other thesis, University of Muhammadiyah Malang.
Download (83Kb) | Preview
In The Constitution of Indonesia Republic Year 1945 section 24 C that one competence of Constitution Courts was examine Code toward Constitution, both of material and formal, but that occurred often times was that competence to be extended by Constitution Judge namely by interpret to Code or Constitution in examining Code toward Constitution. Interpretation was conducted by Constitution Judge as juridical in Constitution there was no competence to interpret Code or Constitution. That competence often times generate multi interpretation, thus there said in examining Code, the Constitution Courts able to interpret, whereas according to the other expert that has rights to interpret was people who made that law. This thesis represent the effort to analysis several problems i.e. how competence of the Constitution Courts in interpreting Code and Constitution in examining Code toward Constitution and how legality of decision the Constitution Courts in examining Code toward Constitution. The writing method used in this thesis was by contents analysis method namely critical analysis from various sections relevant with competence of the Constitution Courts to interpret Code and Constitution in Judicial Review Code toward Constitution and legality of the Constitution Courts decision in examining Code toward Constitution. Data collection technique at this thesis was documentation and literature. The result of analysis was that the Constitution Courts as juridical hasn’t basic of law to interpret both of Constitution of Indonesia Republic Year 1945 or Code was examined by the Constitution Courts and decision legality of the Constitution Courts in examining Code toward Constitution of Indonesia Republic Year 1945 namely since finished to be said in the open plenary session for public. But, it was possible that decision of the Constitution Judge and decision of the Constitution Courts cancelled by law if that decision was not suitable with determinate of Code No. 24 Year 2003 about the Constitution Courts and rule of the Constitution Courts No. 6/PMK/2005 about jurisdiction directive in examining Code. The conclusion was that the Constitution Courts often conduct interpretation that was stated as competence of the Constitution Courts, whereas there was no clear rule on that competence, it was also occurred in legality of the Constitution Courts decision namely since it was stated in the open plenary session for public, but it was possible that decision cancelled by law. Suggestion, it need clear rule about competence of intepretation.
|Item Type:||Thesis (Other)|
|Subjects:||K Law > K Law (General)|
|Divisions:||Faculty of Law > Department of Law|
|Depositing User:||Anggit Aldila|
|Date Deposited:||24 Apr 2012 03:19|
|Last Modified:||24 Apr 2012 03:19|
Actions (login required)