Update Artikelilmiah: 40035

AZAM PRASOJO KADAR

NIM

Judul Artikel

Abstrak (Bhs. Indonesia)

Perkara pengujian formil undang-undang telah banyak diputus oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi salah satunya adalah perkara pengujian formil Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 tentang Cipta Kerja dituangkan dalam Putusan Nomor : 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 dengan amar putusan inkonstitusional bersyarat. Amar putusan inkonstitusional bersyarat merupakan salah satu perluasan perkembangan model putusan di Mahkamah Konstitusi yang menggeser paradigma Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagai negative legislator (pembatal Undang-Undang) ke positive legislatore (pembuat Undang-Undang) yang masih menimbulkan kontroversi di berbagai kalangan. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi bersifat final dan mengikat yang harus dipatuhi semua warga negara terutama addressat dari Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tersebut. Sesuai asas self executing/implementing, putusan tersebut memiliki implikasi hukum tetapi dalam tataran implementasinya terdapat beberapa permasalahan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui ratio decidendi yang digunakan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam memutus perkara dan untuk mengetahui implikasi hukum yang timbul dari putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tersebut. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yuridis normatif dengan spesifikasi penelitian dekskriptif preskriptif. Jenis dan Sumber Bahan Hukum dalam penelitian ini berasal dari data sekunder yaitu bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier dengan metode pengumpulan data studi kepustakaan. Data yang disajikan bersifat runtut, sistematis, dan komprehensif. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian dan pembahasan dapat disimpulkan bahwa pertama ratio decidendi Mahkamah telah sesuai dengan UUD Tahun 1945 dan peraturan perundang-undangan hanya saja belum tepat dalam memberikan penjabaran terkait legal standing Para Pemohon dan kedua implikasi hukum amar putusan inkonstitusional bersyarat masih banyak permasalahan salah satunya amar putusan bersifat multitafsir dan tindakan addressat putusan MK yang tidak sesuai dengan instruksi putusan MK Nomor : 91/PUU-XVIII/2020.

Abtrak (Bhs. Inggris)

Many cases of judicial review of laws have been decided by the Constitutional Court, one of which is the case of judicial review of Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation as outlined in Decision Number: 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 with a conditionally unconstitutional verdict. The conditionally unconstitutional verdict is one of the extensions of the development of the decision model in the Constitutional Court which shifts the paradigm of the Constitutional Court as a negative legislator (annulling the law) to a positive legislatore (lawmaker) which still causes controversy in various circles. The decision of the Constitutional Court is final and binding which must be obeyed by all citizens, especially the address of the Constitutional Court Decision. In accordance with the principle of self executing / implementing, the decision has legal implications but at the level of implementation there are several problems. This study aims to determine the ratio decidendi used by the Constitutional Court in deciding cases and to determine the legal implications arising from the Constitutional Court's decision. The research method used is normative juridical with prescriptive descriptive research specifications. Types and Sources of Legal Materials in this study come from secondary data, namely primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials with literature study data collection methods. The data presented is coherent, systematic, and comprehensive. Based on the results of research and discussion, it can be concluded that first, the Court's ratio decidendi is in accordance with the 1945 Constitution and laws and regulations, it is just that it has not been precise in providing explanations related to the legal standing of the Petitioners and second, the legal implications of the conditionally unconstitutional verdict still have many problems, one of which is that the verdict is multi-interpretive and the action of addressing the Constitutional Court's decision is not in accordance with the instructions of the Constitutional Court's decision Number: 91/PUU-XVIII/2020.

Kata kunci

Pembimbing 1

Pembimbing 2

Pembimbing 3

Tahun

Jumlah Halaman