IMPLIKASI YURIDIS PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 34/PUU-XI/2013 TERHADAP PEMENUHAN ASAS KEPASTIAN HUKUM DAN KEADILAN
| Main Authors: | , EKA LESTARIA, , Dr. Enny Nurbaningsih, S.H., M.Hum. |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis NonPeerReviewed |
| Terbitan: |
[Yogyakarta] : Universitas Gadjah Mada
, 2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: |
https://repository.ugm.ac.id/134178/ http://etd.ugm.ac.id/index.php?mod=penelitian_detail&sub=PenelitianDetail&act=view&typ=html&buku_id=75194 |
Daftar Isi:
- The judge in making a decision, ideally to meet the elements of legal certainty, justice, and expediency. However, sometimes there are still many decisions of judges who do not meet one of these elements, thus causing inconsistency and contradictory between one decision with each other. One of this is Constitutional Court Decision Number 34/PUU-XI/2013 which cancel Subsection 268 (3) Criminal Code Act related reconsideration. This research take a problem about \"What are the juridical implications on Constitutional Court Decision Number 34/PUU-XI/2013 against the fulfillment of principle of legal certainty and justice? \" This research uses normative legal research, with legal materials collection techniques in the form of documentation and library research from books, journals, legislations, scientific creations, papers, althought legal theory relating to the problem. The method used is the legislations approach and cases approach. And then the legal research material was analyzed by descriptive qualitative analysis. In conclusion, the Constitutional Court Decision Number 34/PUU-XI/2013 has implications for the legal uncertainty and injustice. Legal uncertainty from that decision because due consideration in the decision inconsistencies and contradictory with decision number 16/PUU-VIII/2010, giving rise to doubt and uncertainty. The other way, injustice of that decision because the petition is granted by the Constitutional Court related to �Reconsideration� only on criminal cases, while the �Reconsideration� on civil cases and state administrative cases limited to only one time, which has restricted the rights of other citizens to achieve justice in civil cases and state administrative cases