•  
  •  
 

Abstract

One of the duties of the Indonesian Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi - MK) is to determine whether legislation is consistent with the Constitution. If the MK determines that a statute is inconsistent with the Constitution, it declares that such statute is invalid. In such instance, the MK has the final word to determine the validity of legislation. In the view of some scholars, this feature reflects that the MK adopts strong form of judicial review. While this assertion holds true in some cases, it does not necessarily reflect the complete feature of the MK’s approach in deciding cases. In some economic and social rights cases, the MK decision adopts weak form of judicial review. This paper attempts to explain that while constitutionally the MK adopts strong form of judicial review, in some economic and social rights cases it adopts weak form of judicial review.

Bahasa Abstract

Salah satu tugas Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) adalah menentukan apakah suatu undang-undang bertentangan dengan undang-undang dasar. Apabila MK menentukan bahwa suatu undang-undang bertentangan dengan undang-undang dasar maka undang-undang tersebut dinyatakan bertentangan dengan undang-undang dasar. Selanjutnya undang-undang tersebut dinyatakan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat (invalid). Dalam hal ini MK mempunyai kekuasaan yang final untuk menentukan validitas suatu undang-undang. Bagi sebagian ahli, fitur ini menunjukan bahwa MK mengadopsi judicial review yang bersifat kuat (strong form of judicial review). Meskipun penilaian ini benar untuk beberapa kasus, hal ini tidak serta merta menggambarkan fitur yang lengkap dari MK. Dalam beberapa kasus terutama judicial review yang berkaitan dengan hak-hak ekonomi dan hak-hak sosial, MK mengadopsi judicial review yang bersifat lemah (weak form of judicial review). Artikel ini mencoba menjelaskan bahwa meskipun secara konstitusional MK mengadopsi judicial review yang bersifat kuat, dalam beberapa kasus yang terkait dengan hak-hak ekonomi dan hak-hak sosial MK mengadopsi judicial review yang bersifat lemah.

References

Bibliography Legal Documents Indonesia. The 1945 Constitution of the State of the Republic of Indonesia. Indonesia. Undang-undang tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi (Law on the Constitutional Court). Undang-undang nomor 24 tahun 2003, LN No. 98 tahun 2003, TLN No. 4316 (Law No. 24 of 2003, SG No. 98 of 2003). Indonesia. Undang-undang tentang Sumber Daya Air (Law on the Water Resources). Undang-undang Nomor 7 tahun 2004 LN No. 32 tahun 2004, TLN No. 4377 (Law No. 7 of 2007, SG No. 32 of 2004) South Africa. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. Court Decisions Minister of Public Works and Others v. Kyalami Ridge Environmental Association and Others, 2001 (7) BCLR 652 (CC) (S. Afr.). Constitutional Court of the Republic Indonesia. Decision of the Indonesian Constitutional Court Number 058-059-060-063/PUU-II/2004. Decision of the Indonesian Constitutional Court Number 008/PUU-III/2005. Decision of the Indonesian Constitutional Court Number 012/PUU-III/2005. Decision of the Indonesian Constitutional Court Number 026/PUU-III/2005. Decision of the Indonesian Constitutional Court Number 026/PUU-IV/2006 Regarding Judicial Review of the 2006 State Budget Law. Decision of the Indonesian Constitutional Court Number 13/PUU-V/2008. Decision of the Indonesian Constitutional Court Number 004/PUU-I/2003 Regarding Judicial Review of Supreme Court Law Number 14/1985. Decision of the Indonesian Constitutional Court Number 2-3/PUU-V/2007. United States Supreme Court. Brown v. Board of Education., 347 U.S. 483. Government of the Republic of South Africa v Grootboom 2000 (11) BCLR 1169 (CC) (S. Afr.). Books Asshiddiqie, Jimly. Perihal Undang-undang di Indonesia. Jakarta: Mahkamah Konstiutusi RI, Sekretariat Jenderal dan Kepaniteraan, 2006. Butt, Simon. “Indonesia’s Constitutional Court: Conservative Activist or Strategic Operator?” in The Judicialization of Politics in Asia, edited by Björn Dressel, 98-116. New York: Routledge, 2012. Butt, Simon. The Constitutional Court and Democracy in Indonesia. Leiden: Brill, 2015. Hendrianto. “From Humble Beginnings to a Functioning Court: The Indonesian Constitutional Court, 2003-2008.” Disssertation, University of Washington, 2008. Jackson, C. Vicki and Mark V. Tushnet. Comparative Constitutional Law. New York: Foundation Press, 1999. Stockmann, Petra. The New Indonesian Constitutional Court: A Study Into Its Beginning and First Years of Work. Jakarta: Hanns Seidel Foundation, 2007. Tushnet, Mark. Weak Courts, Strong Rights: Judicial Review and Social Welfare Rights in Comparative Constitutional Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009.

Articles Dorf, Michael C. and Charles F. Sabel “A Constitution of Democratic Experimentalism.” Columbia Law Review 98 (1998): 267-473. Moh Mahfud MD, “Separation of Powers and the Independence of Constitutional Court in Indonesia” (presentation, the 2nd Congress of the World Conference on Constitutional Justice, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 16-18 January, 2011); Omara, Andy. “Lessons from the Korean Constitutional Court: What Can Indonesia Learn from the Korean Constitutional Court Experience?” Korea Legislation Research Institute research paper, Sejong, 2008. Scheppele, Kim Lane and Gerald N. Rosenberg. “The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring about Social Change?.” Contemporary Sociology 21 (1992): . doi:10.2307/2075854. Tushnet, Mark. “New Forms of Judicial Review and the Persistence of Rights-and Democracy-Based Worries.” Wake Forest Law Review 38 (2003): 813-838. Tushnet, Mark. “Social Welfare Rights and the Forms of Judicial Review.” Texas Law Review 82 (2003): 1895-1919. Venning, Philippa. “Determination of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights by the Indonesian Constitutional Court,” Australian Journal of Asian Law 10, no. 1 (2008): 100-132. Wibowo, Mardian. “ Justices’ Freedom of Constitutional Interpretation Method in the Indonesian Constitutional Court.” Mimbar Hukum 25, No. 2 (2013): 284-299.s

Download

Share

COinS