Tinjauan Terhadap Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor : 005/PUU-IV/2006 Dan Implikasinya Terhadap Kewenangan Komisi Yudisial Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor : 22 Tahun 2004 Tentang Komisi Yudisial
Total View This Week0
Total View This Week0
Institusion
Universitas Islam Riau
Author
Suzarma, Mayandri
Subject
K Law (General)
Datestamp
2022-04-06 07:38:33
Abstract :
One of the new state institutions in the 1945 Constitution is the Judicial Commission regulated in Article 24 B which consists of 4 (four) paragraphs. The duties and authority of the Judicial Commission regulated in Law Number 22 Year 2004, are considered to exceed the limits of their authority and are declared contrary to the 1945 Constitution. The main problem in this research is how the implications of the Constitutional Court's Decision Number: 005 / PUU-IV / 2006 for the Judicial Commission's Authority based on Law Number 22 Year 2004 Regarding Judicial Commission and how is the authority of the Judicial Commission in the framework of maintaining and upholding honor, dignity and dignity and the behavior of judges after the Constitutional Court Decision Number: 005 / PUU-IV / 2006. The research method used in this research is normative legal research that is library law research, data collection by studying books, legislation, and writings related to this research. The nature of the research is analytical descriptive, which is to provide a clear and detailed description of an event regarding the Review of the Constitutional Court's Decision Number: 005 / PUU-IV / 2006 and its Implications for the Judicial Commission's Authority Based on Law Number: 22 of 2004 concerning Judicial Commission. Research Results, Implications of the Constitutional Court Decision Number: 005 / PUU-IV / 2006 is the emergence of a legal vacuum regarding the implementation of judicial supervision by the Judicial Commission. With this decision, Judicial Oversight again relies on internal supervision. In addition, the decision of the Constitutional Court Number: 005 / PUU-IV / 2006 caused a shift in the constitutional authority of the Judicial Commission, that is, it could not carry out supervision of the constitutional judges. To carry out supervision of the Constitutional Court, a Constitutional Court Honorary Council was formed to monitor, examine and recommend actions against constitutional judges who allegedly violated the Code of Ethics and the Code of Conduct for Constitutional Justices. The legal basis for the formation of the Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court was the first time namely the Constitutional Court Regulation Number: 10 / PMK / 2006 The Constitutional Honor Council was formed to uphold the code of ethics and behavior of constitutional justices. The Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court was normalized in Act Number 18 of 20011 concerning Amendment to Law Number 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Cou
One of the new state institutions in the 1945 Constitution is the Judicial Commission regulated in Article 24 B which consists of 4 (four) paragraphs. The duties and authority of the Judicial Commission regulated in Law Number 22 Year 2004, are considered to exceed the limits of their authority and are declared contrary to the 1945 Constitution. The main problem in this research is how the implications of the Constitutional Court's Decision Number: 005 / PUU-IV / 2006 for the Judicial Commission's Authority based on Law Number 22 Year 2004 Regarding Judicial Commission and how is the authority of the Judicial Commission in the framework of maintaining and upholding honor, dignity and dignity and the behavior of judges after the Constitutional Court Decision Number: 005 / PUU-IV / 2006. The research method used in this research is normative legal research that is library law research, data collection by studying books, legislation, and writings related to this research. The nature of the research is analytical descriptive, which is to provide a clear and detailed description of an event regarding the Review of the Constitutional Court's Decision Number: 005 / PUU-IV / 2006 and its Implications for the Judicial Commission's Authority Based on Law Number: 22 of 2004 concerning Judicial Commission. Research Results, Implications of the Constitutional Court Decision Number: 005 / PUU-IV / 2006 is the emergence of a legal vacuum regarding the implementation of judicial supervision by the Judicial Commission. With this decision, Judicial Oversight again relies on internal supervision. In addition, the decision of the Constitutional Court Number: 005 / PUU-IV / 2006 caused a shift in the constitutional authority of the Judicial Commission, that is, it could not carry out supervision of the constitutional judges. To carry out supervision of the Constitutional Court, a Constitutional Court Honorary Council was formed to monitor, examine and recommend actions against constitutional judges who allegedly violated the Code of Ethics and the Code of Conduct for Constitutional Justices. The legal basis for the formation of the Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court was the first time namely the Constitutional Court Regulation Number: 10 / PMK / 2006 The Constitutional Honor Council was formed to uphold the code of ethics and behavior of constitutional justices. The Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court was normalized in Act Number 18 of 20011 concerning Amendment to Law Number 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Cou
Download
book
BibTex
Latex, Jabref
cloud_download
Original Resource
url resource Institution
