Legal Literacy - This article discusses a review of Articles 12 and 22 1945 Constitution in the context of a state of emergency (Forced Urgency). An in-depth analysis is carried out on the differences between the concepts of "state of danger" and "forced urgency," as well as their juridical implications. This article also evaluates the validity of Perpu in emergency situations, including the case example of the Job Creation Perpu, and presents views from legal experts. This explanation is important to understand the legal mechanisms governing state emergency actions according to the constitution.

Review of Articles 12 and 22 of the 1945 Constitution in the Context of a State of Emergency (Forced Urgency)

As a complex system, in practice the state does not only run in a state of peace without obstacles but also in a state of emergency. This emergency situation requires further regulation as an anticipatory alternative to these unexpected and undesirable things. Furthermore, these regulations are also needed for the efficiency and effectiveness of legal institutions and state institutions so that they can continue to function as they should. This is because a state of emergency is diametrically opposed to a state of peace which allows a country to run without obstacles.

Jimly in his book “Emergency Constitutional Law” as quoted from Kim Lane Scheppele describes the concept of emergency in a country. The concept of emergency is definitively described as a situation when a country is faced with a life-and-death threat that requires a responsive action that under normal circumstances cannot be justified according to the principles adopted by the country concerned.[1] In addition, Kim also added that the justification for doing things that are impossible to do under normal circumstances can only be done in extreme circumstances. In other words, the state is forced to take extraordinary actions that violate the principles it adheres to. Therefore, the state of emergency can be referred to as an extraordinary state or the state of exception. [2]

By looking at this picture, a common thread can be drawn regarding the concept of emergency in a country. First, there is a serious threat that threatens a country. Second, responsive action is needed in dealing with these threats. Third, that action cannot be taken under normal circumstances. In addition, this concept of emergency is described differently in the Indonesian constitution. The Indonesian constitution divides this state of emergency into two forms, namely a state of danger and matters of compelling urgency.