Main Article Content

Abstract

The Constitutional Court has the authority to determine the addressed subject in order to make adjustments to laws that have been assessed or interpreted for their constitutionality. This determination usually only applies to applications that are granted and not applications that are rejected in their entirety. In Decision Number 20/PUU-XIX/2021 (Case for Reviewing Article 50 paragraph (4) of Law Number 14 of 2005 on Teachers and Lecturers in conformity with the 1945 Constitution), the Court emphasized in the Legal Considerations section two facts that were proven to be sufficiently justified in accordance with the law, which then became the basis for the Court to instruct the addressed subject to be adjusted. The issue to be addressed in this study is, do the legal considerations (Court Opinion) in the decision have the similar legally binding force as the decisive ruling. This is a normative legal research, accompanied by the use of a statutory approach, a case approach, and a conceptual approach. The results of the study indicate that based on the implementation of Decision Number 20/PUU-XIX/2021, legal reasoning, both ratio decidendi and obiter dicta, have the same legally binding force as the ruling. Legal considerations in a decision can be a "formal legal source" in the preparation of decisions and/or state administrative actions, and become a guideline (morally binding) in the formation of PERPU and laws. Specifically for constitutional courts, legal considerations are perfectly binding on the addressed subject if desired by the Court, especially because legal considerations are an authentic interpretation of the judge regarding a case of the constitutionality of a law. The Court's legal considerations therefore need to be positioned as the basis for regulating (legally binding) the formation of laws, so that explicit affirmation is needed in the relevant laws, especially the Constitutional Court Law regarding the binding force of legal considerations as an inseparable part of the decision.
Keywords: Constitutional Court, Judicial Decisions, Legal Considerations.


Abstrak
Mahkamah Konstitusi dapat menetapkan adressat putusan untuk melakukan penyesuaian terhadap undang-undang yang telah dinilai atau ditafsirkan konstitusionalitasnya. Penetapan ini, lazimnya hanya berlaku kepada permohonan yang dikabulkan dan bukan permohonan yang ditolak untuk seluruhnya. Pada Putusan Nomor 20/PUU-XIX/2021 (Perkara Pengujian Pasal 50 ayat (4) Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 2005 tentang Guru dan Dosen terhadap UUD 1945), dalam bagian Pertimbangan Hukum, Mahkamah menegaskan dua fakta yang terbukti cukup beralasan menurut hukum, yang kemudian menjadi dasar Mahkamah menginstruksikan kepada adressat putusan untuk ditindaklajuti. Permasalahan yang ingin dijawab dalam penelitian ini adalah apakah pertimbangan hukum (Pendapat Mahkamah) dalam putusan memiliki kekuatan hukum mengikat yang sama sebagaimana amar putusan. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif yang disertai penggunaan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, pendekatan kasus, dan pendekatan konseptual. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan, berdasarkan implementasi Putusan Nomor 20/PUU-XIX/2021, pertimbangan hukum (legal reasoning), baik yang bersifat ratio decidendi maupun obiter dicta, memiliki kekuatan hukum mengikat yang sama sebagaimana amar putusan. Pertimbangan hukum dalam putusan dapat menjadi ‘sumber hukum formil’ dalam penyusunan keputusan dan/atau tindakan tata usaha negara, dan menjadi pedoman (morally binding) dalam pembentukan perppu dan undang-undang. Khusus peradilan konstitusional, pertimbangan hukum mengikat secara sempurna terhadap adressat putusan apabila dikehendaki oleh Mahkamah, terutama karena pertimbangan hukum merupakan tafsiran atau interpretasi otentik hakim terhadap suatu perkara konstitusionalitas undang-undang. Pertimbangan hukum Mahkamah, karenanya perlu diposisikan sebagai dasar pengaturan (legally binding) pembentukan undang-undang, sehingga diperlukan penegasan secara eksplisit dalam undang-undang terkait, terutama Undang-Undang Mahkamah Konstitusi perihal kekuatan mengikat pertimbangan hukum sebagai bagian tidak terpisahkan dari putusan.
Kata Kunci: Mahkamah Konstitusi, Pertimbangan Hukum, Putusan Peradilan.

Keywords

Constitutional Court Judicial Decisions Legal Considerations

Article Details

How to Cite
Gunawan A. Tauda. (2024). Kekuatan Mengikat Pertimbangan Hukum Putusan Mahkamah Konsitusi dalam Perkara Pengujian Undang-Undang (Studi Putusan Nomor 20/PUU-XIX/2021). Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM, 31(2), 358–383. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol31.iss2.art6

References

Read More