Abstract :
Civil servant as country's apparatus aimed to implement authority and development so that it could be applied as the rule stated. From the existing phenomena where civil servant wanted to participate in political party, it needed further discussion. That's why in this final assignment, the writer wanted to discuss further about civil employee prohibition as member or board of political party with statement of problems: (1) What were the philosophical base for civil servant prohibition to be a member of political party according to Rule No.43 / 1999 about the Employment? (2) Were the civil servant prohibition in its participation in political party arranged in Employment rule against Human Rights Law? From the statement of problems, the writer used juridical-normative research. Law material analysisused was descriptive analysis. From the analysis, the writer could get the discussion, that was in section 20 DUHAM jo section 22 verse (1) SIPOL convention arranged about grouping freedom, but in section 22 verse (2) SIPOL convention stated that the freedom were able to be limited along the arrangement of law. Then in section 28E verse (3) Constitutional Law 1945 and section 24 verse (1) Law No.39 / 1999 about Human Rights, there also explained about freedom to group. But the limitation was arranged in section 28J verse (2) Constitutional Law 1945 and section 24 verse (2) Law No.39 / 1999 about Human Rights explained that the freedom limitation should fit with the rule. In relation with it, civil servant limitation to become political party member in section 3 Rule No.43 / 1999 about Employment stated the civil servant prohibition to become a member of political party. So the civil servant prohibition in politic in International Human Rights rule in general didn't come against the Human Rights in Indonesia.