Main Article Content

Abstract

The issues raised in this article are first, examining the opinion of the Constitutional Court justices in the Constitutional Court Decision No. 36 / PUU-XV / 2017 and second, analyzing the implications of the Constitutional Court Decision No. 36.PUU-XV / 2017 against the existence of the KPK. The research is a normative legal study with the data collection methods of document study and analyzed by using the descriptive-qualitative methods. The results of this study indicate that, First, there are three different opinions in the Constitutional Court Decision No. 36 / PUU-XV / 2017. The first opinion, the KPK is in the realm of executive power so that the DPR has the right to exercise the right of inquiry to the KPK. In addition, until now there are no other state institutions that can control the KPK so that the DPR can use its questionnaire rights to carry out its supervisory functions. The second opinion is that the KPK is an independent state institution outside the legislative, judicial and executive powers. And the third opinion states that the KPK is in the realm of executives who are independent. So that the Parliament can not use the right of inquiry to the KPK. Second, the implication for the existence of the KPK is that the KPK's relationship with political power, especially in the parliament, is increasingly not ideal. Though the KPK was formed as an independent state institution. The relationship between the KPK and political power will be ideal if the election of the KPK chairperson is appointed by its own members and is no longer elected through the DPR.

Keywords

DPR inquiry right KPK

Article Details

Author Biography

Bakri Iskandar, Universitas Islam Indonesia

Pascasarjana Hukum
How to Cite
Iskandar, B. (2020). Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 36/PUU-XV/2017 Tentang Hak Angket Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Terhadap Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi. Lex Renaissance, 4(2), 410–431. https://doi.org/10.20885/JLR.vol4.iss2.art12

References

  1. Buku
  2. Assidiqie, Jimly, Pengantar Hukum Tata Negara, Rajawali Pers, Jakarta, 2009.
  3. Gaffar, Janedjri M., Demokrasi Konstitusional Praktik Ketatanegaraan Indonesia Setelah Perubahan UUD 1945, Konstitusi Press, Jakarta, 2012.
  4. Garner, Brian A., Black Law Dicitionary, Ninth edition, West Group, 2009.
  5. Hantoro, Novianto M., Urgensi Pembentukan Undang-Undang Hak Angket DPR RI, Pusat Penelitian Badan Keahlian DPR RI Komplek MPR/DPR/DPD, 2017.
  6. Hasan, Iqbal, Pokok-Pokok Materi Metodologi Penelitian dan Aplikasinya, Ghalia Indonesia, Jakarta, 2002.
  7. Marzuki, Peter Mahmud, Penelitian Hukum, Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta, 2012.
  8. Tauda, Gunawan A., Komisi Negara Independen (Eksistensi Independent Agencies sebagai cabang Kekuasaan Baru dalam Sistem Ketatanegaraan), Genta Press, Yogyakarta, 2012.
  9. Jurnal
  10. Fitria, “Penguatan Fungsi Pengawasan DPR Melalui Perubahan Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 1954 tentang Hak Angket”, Jurnal Cita Hukum Vol. I No. 1 Juni 2014, 2014.
  11. Ichwanuddin, Wawan, “Absenya Politk Pengawaan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR) Era Reformasi”, Jurnal Penelitian Politik, Pusat Penelitian Politik (Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia/LIPI), Vol. 9, No. 2 Tahun 2012.
  12. Peraturan Perundang-Undangan
  13. Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945
  14. Undang-Undang Nomor 39 Tahun 1999 tentang Hak Asasi Manusia; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 3886
  15. Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2002 tentang Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 4250
  16. Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2008 tentang Ombudsman; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 4899
  17. Undang-Undang Nomor 3 Tahun 2009 tentang Perubahan Kedua atas Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 1985 tentang Mahkamah Agung; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 4958
  18. Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2011 tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undnag Nomor24 Tahun 2003 Tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5226
  19. Undang-Undang Nomor 18 Tahun 2011 tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 22 Tahun 2004 tentang Komisi Yudisial; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5250
  20. Undang-Undang Nomor 17 Tahun 2014 tentang Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5568
  21. Undang-Undang Nomor7 Tahun 2017 tentang Pemilihan Umum; Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2017 Nomor 182
  22. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 36/PIUU-XV/2017 tentang Pengujian Konstitusionalitas Undang-Undang Nomor17 Tahun 2014 tentang Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah
  23. Internet
  24. https://www.suara.com/news/2017/06/22/153532/miryam-cabut-bap-korupsi-e-ktp-jaksa-kpk-alasannya-tak-logis, diakses pada tanggal 24 Agustus 2019.
  25. https://news.detik.com/berita/d-3724956/miryam-terbukti-berbohong-apa-kabar-pansus-angket-kpk, diakses pada tanggal 5 April 2019.
  26. https://kbbi.web.id/angket, diakses pada tanggal 1 Januari 2019.