Supriatna, Yayat (2008) PELARANGAN ORGANISASI/PARTAI BERIDEOLOGI KOMUNISME/MARXISME-LENINISME DI INDONESIA DALAM PERSPEKTIF PASAL 28E (3) UUD 1945. Other thesis, University of Muhammadiyah Malang.
Download (99kB) | Preview
Since it was stated forbidden post G 30 S, Indonesia Communist Party (PKI) at the same time Communism / Marxism-Leninism ideology become scariest matter till now. New Order under Soeharto had come to lance destruction of PKI with its isms in Indonesia. By Ketetapan MPRS No. XXV/MPRS/1966 PKI and its isms become forbidden both of ideology and practice as organization / party. The basic of this research discuss about forbidden organization / party that has Communism ideology / Marxism-Leninism in Indonesia in perspective Section 28 E (3) UUD 1945 mentioned that everyone have rights to federal freedom, gathering, and express opinion. There are four problems would be researched, first about background of Ketetapan MPRS XXV/MPRS/1966, Second about the purpose of state prohibit Communism / Marxism-Leninism in Indonesia, third about how development of law on politic related with disbandment of PKI, and fourth analysis about enjoinment of organization / Communist party / Marxism-Leninism in Indonesia in perspective Section 28 E ( 3) of UUD this 1945. Purpose of the research to know how far PKI along with Communism ideology / Marxism become forbidden organization / party in Indonesia and find what purpose of state and direction of law development related with political area and to know the prohibition in perspective of Section 28 E (3) UUD 1945. Research method used was method research of normative law. Studied problems will be analyzed by secondary data through primary of law materials in the form UUD 1945 Section 28E (3), Ketetapan MPRS No. XXV/MPRS 1966, Decision MPR No.I/MPR/2003 and Code No. 27/1999. By the research was resulted 1) Background of Ketetapan MPRS/XXV/1966, first evaluated from histories aspect namely occurring G 30 S or G 30 S/PKI by governmental version. Second evaluated from sociological-politic factor, occurred hard reactions from various group curse action of G30S. Third, juridical factor namely appearance of SUPERSEMAR generated Kepres No.1/3/1966 about Disbandment of PKI. Ketetapan MPRS No. IX/MPRS/1966 then legalized SUPERSEMAR and Ketetapan MPRS No. XXV/MPRS/1966 confirmed Kepres / Pangti ABRI No. 1/3/1966 2) The purpose of State in prohibition organization / party had Communism ideology / Marxism-Leninism in Indonesia First; Saving Pancasila and UUD 1945. Second, effort to prevent recurred of history 3) Direction of law development related with political area about disbandment of PKI in Indonesia divided by two periods. First, at a New Order period early by Justify operation and formulate Pancasila ideology as a single ideology. Second was New Order period early by appearance of UU No 27 / 1999 about change of KUHP relate to criminal to Security State had items about reinforcement of Ketetapan MPRS XXV/MPRS/1966 considered to be the part of Safety to growth of communist ism in Indonesia. Attempt to vanish Ketetapan MPRS XXV/MPRS/1966 discourse by Gus Dur. At Annual Conference MPR on 2003, Ketetapan MPRS XXV/MPRS/1966 remains to be valid according to Ketetapan MPR No. I/MPR/2003. Megawati rehabilitated mass to Communism issue victim so that emerged Code No.27 / 2004 about Commission of Truth and Reconciliation which was later this code would be deleted. Hardness and actions anti Communism remain occurred at leadership of SBY 4) Basically federal freedom and gather that was existed in Section 28E (3) represents guarantee to protection of HAM in state constitution. Principal of lex specialis derogat lex generalis indicated that Ketetapan MPRS XXV/MPRS/1966 couldn’t be told oppose against UUD 1945 Section 28E (3). Principle of lex superiore derogat lex inferiore explained that Ketetapan MPRS XXV/MPRS/1966 have political background, its elements hasn’t protection of HAM, guaranteed by UUD 1945 Section 28E (3) about federal freedom and gather could be told oppose against HAM existed in constitution written by UUD 1945 Section 28E (3). Thus can be concluded that Ketetapan MPRS XXV/MPRS/1966 represent product of politics importance bringing calamity most bloody and deny protection of HAM which was guaranteed in constitution written by UUD 1945.
|Item Type:||Thesis (Other)|
|Subjects:||K Law > K Law (General)|
|Divisions:||Faculty of Law > Department of Law|
|Depositing User:||Rayi Tegar Pamungkas|
|Date Deposited:||12 Jun 2012 08:48|
|Last Modified:||12 Jun 2012 08:48|
Actions (login required)