Abstract
This article delves into the crucial aspects of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia's decision, focusing on the emergency state of administrative law concerning open legal policy decisions referred back to legislators, particularly regarding the tenure of village heads. The study employs a conceptual and legal approach, centering on the Constitutional Court Decision No.15/PUU-XI/2023 concerning the village head's position. This represents an open legal policy for law framers, paving the way for the political prevention of Pilkades (village head elections) money politics. Law No. 6 of 2014, which is under consideration for revision, lacks explicit measures against money politics. The methodology adopted is normative legal research that integrates legal theory with legislation. The findings indicate that open legal policy rulings necessitate immediate action by law framers, signaling administrative law urgency. The rationale is that law framers must react to that decision, and revising the law does not necessarily require inclusion in the National Legislation Program (Prolegnas). Decision on open legal policies must be administratively executed by law framers, including the issuance of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perpu), which subsequently require legislative approval to become law. In essence, the decision of the Constitutional Court carries a moral and ethical coercive force, achieved by transforming ius constitutum into ius constituendum.
Publisher
UIN Prof. K.H. Saifuddin Zuhri
Reference54 articles.
1. Ahmad, Jafar, Heri Herdiawanto, and Laode Harjudin. “Transformation of the Political Struggle Model at the Village Level Due to the Fight for Village Fund Resources: A Case Study of Village Head Elections before and after the Enactment of UU Desa Number 6 of 2014.” Masyarakat, Kebudayaan & Politik 36, no. 1 (2023).
2. Ajie, Radita. “Limits of Policy Choices for Law Makers (Open Legal Policy) in Forming Legislation Based on Interpretation of Constitutional Court Decisions.” Indonesian Legislation 13, no. 2 (2016): 111–20.
3. Al-Fatih, Sholahuddin. “INTERPRETATION OF OPEN LEGAL POLICY BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL JUDGES IN JUDICIAL REVIEW OF PARLIAMENTARY THRESHOLDS.” Diponegoro Law Review 6, no. 2 (October 2021): 231–46. https://doi.org/10.14710/dilrev.6.2.2021.231-246.
4. Andriawan, Wawan. “Pancasila Perspective on the Development of Legal Philosophy: Relation of Justice and Progressive Law.” Volksgeist: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Konstitusi 5, no. 1 (June 2022): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.24090/VOLKSGEIST.V5I1.6361.
5. Arde-Acquah, Phoebe E. “Salus Populi Supreme Lex Estp: Balancing Civil Liberties and Public Health Interventions in Modern Vaccination Policy.” Wash. U. Jurisprudence Rev. 7 (2014): 337.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献