https://open.spotify.com/episode/7gBBQPilTqJMIwoIpCZHTX?si=rX6IJ42WRv-9VbCCoIshdg
https://open.spotify.com/episode/7gBBQPilTqJMIwoIpCZHTX?si=rX6IJ42WRv-9VbCCoIshdg
| Journal Article Title | Problems of Constitutional Court Regulations and Their Implications |
| Author | 1. Adam Ilyas 2. Dicky Eko Prasetio |
| Publisher | Constitutional Journal Vol. 19 No. 4 2022 Edition |
| Abstract | The position of the Constitutional Court Regulation (PMK) in the hierarchy of laws and regulations is not explicitly regulated, so it is not known where its position is and which institution has the right to conduct a Judicial Review of it. Therefore, this study will examine 3 things, namely: (i) the position of PMK, (ii) the implications of PMK that have not been enacted, and (iii) the institution that has the right to conduct a Judicial Review of PMK. The research method used is the normative legal research method. The result is that PMK has a "conditional" position equivalent to a Presidential Regulation because it has the same function. Although it has the same "conditional" position, PMK has not been tested by any institution to date because it has not been enacted in the State Gazette, which should also imply that it cannot bind the public. Therefore, PMK should be enacted in the State Gazette, so that it can bind the public and the institution that has the right to test it is the Supreme Court. That way, parties who litigate in the Constitutional Court will obtain legal certainty and protection. |
https://open.spotify.com/episode/3aysJBounjeZfGo1mApLvP?si=alrDp3MqR4S31e_lFamKPA
Comments
0Share your perspective politely, stay relevant, and focus on the article. Comments appear after moderation.
Join the discussion
Write a clear, polite response that stays on topic.
No comments yet. Be the first to discuss.
Comments will appear after moderation.