Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Constitutional Court Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 marked a significant turning point in Indonesia’s legislative politics. For the first time, the Court declared a statute conditionally unconstitutional on the grounds of procedural defects, while simultaneously affirming the importance of meaningful public participation and due process in law-making. Nevertheless, subsequent developments have revealed an ambivalent trajectory. The Government issued Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 2 of 2022, which was later enacted as Law No. 6 of 2023, while the amendment to the Law on the Formation of Laws and Regulations through Law No. 13 of 2022 effectively institutionalized the omnibus method as a permanent legislative technique. This article examines the reconstruction of Indonesia’s legislative politics following Constitutional Court Decision No. 91/2020, particularly in relation to the omnibus law method, legislative delegation, and constitutional control. It employs a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and case-based approaches, drawing on an analysis of the 1945 Constitution, the Job Creation Law, the Law on the Formation of Laws and Regulations, the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law on the Job Creation, and relevant Constitutional Court decisions issued after 2020. The study identifies three principal tendencies. First, the omnibus method has undergone a process of normalization within Indonesia’s legislative framework. Second, delegated legislation has reinforced a pattern of executive-heavy law-making, shifting substantial normative authority toward the executive branch. Third, constitutional control over formal judicial review remains inconsistent in its application. At the same time, although the Constitutional Court has normatively strengthened the principle of public participation, such participation has not yet been adequately institutionalized in legislative practice. This article argues that the reconstruction of Indonesia’s legislative politics should be directed toward limiting the use of the omnibus method, tightening the scope of normative delegation, strengthening meaningful public participation, and developing more robust mechanisms of checks and balances and constitutional dialogue. Such measures are necessary to ensure that the legislative process is brought back into alignment with the principles of the rule of law and constitutional democracy.
Keywords
Article Details
Copyright (c) 2026 Nanik Prasetyoningsih, Allan Fatchan Gani Wardhana
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
References
Adhisatya, Alfan Prahasta, and Sunny Ummul Firdaus. “Penerapan Omnibus Law Dalam Sistem Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Indonesia.” Res Publica 5, no. 3 (2021): 267–95.
A’la, Muhammad Amiril, and Aditya Prastian Supriyadi. “Omnibus Law Sebagai Reformasi Hukum Investasi Di Indonesia Berdasarkan Asas Hirarki Peraturan Perundang-Undangan.” Al-Huquq: Journal of Indonesian Islamic Economic Law 2, no. 2 (2020): 133. https://doi.org/10.19105/alhuquq.v2i2.3161.
Anggono, Bayu Dwi. “Omnibus Law Sebagai Teknik Pembentukan Undang-Undang: Peluang Adopsi Dan Tantangannya Dalam Sistem Perundang-Undangan Indonesia.” Jurnal Rechts Vinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional 9, no. 1 (2020): 17. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v9i1.389.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v9i1.389Anggono, Bayu Dwi. Pokok-Pokok Pemikiran Penataan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia. Konstitusi Press, 2020.
Artioko, Fiqih Rizki. “PENGADOPSIAN PARTISIPASI MASYARAKAT YANG BERMAKNA (MEANINGFUL PARTICIPATION) DALAM UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 13 TAHUN 2022TENTANG PERUBAHAN KEDUA UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 12 TAHUN 2011 TENTANG PEMBENTUKAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN.” Al-Qisth Law Review 6, no. 1 (2022): 52. https://doi.org/10.24853/al-qisth.6.1.52-83.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24853/al-qisth.6.1.52-83Aryani, Christina. “REFORMULASI SISTEM PEMBENTUKAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN MELALUI PENERAPAN OMNIBUS LAW.” JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW 4, no. 1 (2021): 27–48. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v4i1.3194.
Asshiddiqie, Jimly. Omnibus Law Dan Penerapannya Di Indonesia. Konstitusi Press, 2020.
Bappenas. Data RISPK. Bappenas, 2024.
Dianisa, Tifani Rizki, and Gayatri Dyah Suprobowati. “Penerapan Teori Legislasi Dalam Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia.” Souvereignty : Jurnal Demokrasi Dan Ketahanan Nasional: Jurnal Demokrasi Dan Ketahanan Nasiona 1 (2022): 298–305.
Dixon, Rosalind. “Responsive Judicial Review in Central & Eastern Europe.” Review of Central and East European Law 48 (2023): 375–402. https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-bja10093.
Dodek, Adam M. “Omnibus Bills : Constitutional Constraints and Legislative Liberations.” Ottawa Law Review 48, no. 1 (2017): 1–42.
Fadillah, Nor. “Analisis Metode Penafsiran Mahkamah Konstitusi Dalam Perumusan Putusan Nomor 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 Terkait Pengujian Formil Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 Tentang Cipta Kerja.” Jurnal Lex Renaissance 7, no. 4 (2022): 726–44. https://doi.org/10.20885/JLR.vol7.iss4.art4.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20885/JLR.vol7.iss4.art4Fioramonti, L., and A. Fiori. “The Changing Roles of Civil Society in Democratization: Evidence from South Africa (1990-2009) and South Korea (1987-2009).” African and Asian Studies 9, nos. 1–2 (2010): 83–104. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1163/156921010X491272.
Guswara, Arrafi Bima, and Ali Imran Nasution. “Dinamika Konstitusionalitas Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 Dan 54/PUU-XXI/2023.” JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW 6, no. 3 (2023): 1052–72. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i3.7844.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i3.7844Hilmy, Yunan. Kajian Awal Mengenai Implikasi Putusan MK No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 Terhadap Upaya Reformasi Regulasi. no. 91. PUSAT ANALISIS DAN EVALUASI HUKUM NASIONAL BADAN PEMBINAAN HUKUM NASIONAL KEMENTERIAN HUKUM DAN HAM RI, 2020.
Ibrahim, Johnny. Teori Dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum. Bayu Media, 2006.
Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW). Laporan Partisipasi Publik Dalam Legislasi. Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW, 2023.
Irawan, Atang. “Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja Di Tengah Himpitan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 91/PUU-XVIII/2020.” Jurnal Litigasi 23, no. 1 (2022): 101–33. https://dx.doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v23i1.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v23i1.4773Kim, J. “Upgrading Constitutionalism: The Ups and Downs of Constitutional Developments in South Korea Since 2000.” In Constitutionalism in Asia in the Early Twenty-First Century. Cambridge University Press, 2014. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107338333.005.
Kurniawan, I Gede Agus. “Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Terhadap Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja Dalam Perspektif Filsafat Utilitarianisme.” JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW 5, no. 1 (2022): 282–98. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v5i1.4941.
Leif Petersen, Matthew Gaylard. “Policy Brief Putusan MK 91 - Omnibus Law: Jeda Krisis Sementara.” In Pancanaka, vol. 1. no. September. Jakarta, 2019.
Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. Penelitian Hukum. Kencana, 2011.
OECD. Regulatory Impact Assessment Toolkit. 1st ed. OECD Publishing, n.d.
Pratama, Nur Aji. “MEANINGFUL PARTICIPATION SEBAGAI UPAYA KOMPROMI IDEE DES RECHT PASCA PUTUSAN MK NO. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020.” CREPIDO 4, no. 2 (2022): 137–47. https://doi.org/10.14710/crepido.4.2.137-147.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/crepido.4.2.137-147Pratiwi, S. “Partisipasi Publik Sebagai Hak Asasi Dalam Pembentukan Undang-Undang: Telaah Putusan MK No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020.” Jurnal Konstitusi 19, no. 3 (2022): 415–36.
Rishan, Idul. “Evaluasi Performa Legislasi Dalam Pembentukan Omnibus Law Cipta Kerja : Kajian Legisprudensi.” Undang: Jurnal Hukum 5, no. 1 (2022): 43–67. https://doi.org/10.22437/ujh.5.1.43-67.
Rishan, Idul. “Konsep Pengujian Formil Undang- Undang Di Mahkamah Konstitusi.” Jurnal Konstitusi 18, no. 1 (2021): 1–21.
Suhardin, Yohanes, and Henny Saida Flora. “Eksistensi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Pasca Disahkannya Undang-Undang Penetapan Perpu Cipta Kerja.” JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW 6, no. 1 (2023): 320–31. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i1.6307.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i1.6307United Nation. “Guidelines on Public Participation in Law-Making.” UNDP, 2019.
Villiers, B. de. “The Utility of Comparative Constitutional Law – the Practical Contribution by South Africa to a World Searching for Consistency in Democratic Practices.” Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe 18, no. 1 (2019): 1–19. Scopus.
Warjiyati, Sri, Zeti Nofita Sari, Nur Lailatul Musyafaah, and Dina Imam Supaat. “Implication of The Constitutional Court’s Decision No. 91/Puu-XVIII/2020 on The Formal Examination of Law No. 11 of 2020.” Jurnal Jurisprudence, December 30, 2024, 192–212. https://doi.org/10.23917/jurisprudence.v14i2.6297.
Wicaksono, Dian Agung. “QUO VADIS PENDIRIAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM MENGUJI UNDANG-UNDANG CIPTA KERJA DAN IMPLIKASINYA TERHADAP KEGAMANGAN PEMERINTAH DAERAH DALAM MELAKSANAKAN KEWENANGAN MENGATUR.” Jurnal Rechts Vinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional 11, no. 1 (2022): 77. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v11i1.846.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v11i1.846
References
Adhisatya, Alfan Prahasta, and Sunny Ummul Firdaus. “Penerapan Omnibus Law Dalam Sistem Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Indonesia.” Res Publica 5, no. 3 (2021): 267–95.
A’la, Muhammad Amiril, and Aditya Prastian Supriyadi. “Omnibus Law Sebagai Reformasi Hukum Investasi Di Indonesia Berdasarkan Asas Hirarki Peraturan Perundang-Undangan.” Al-Huquq: Journal of Indonesian Islamic Economic Law 2, no. 2 (2020): 133. https://doi.org/10.19105/alhuquq.v2i2.3161.
Anggono, Bayu Dwi. “Omnibus Law Sebagai Teknik Pembentukan Undang-Undang: Peluang Adopsi Dan Tantangannya Dalam Sistem Perundang-Undangan Indonesia.” Jurnal Rechts Vinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional 9, no. 1 (2020): 17. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v9i1.389.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v9i1.389Anggono, Bayu Dwi. Pokok-Pokok Pemikiran Penataan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia. Konstitusi Press, 2020.
Artioko, Fiqih Rizki. “PENGADOPSIAN PARTISIPASI MASYARAKAT YANG BERMAKNA (MEANINGFUL PARTICIPATION) DALAM UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 13 TAHUN 2022TENTANG PERUBAHAN KEDUA UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 12 TAHUN 2011 TENTANG PEMBENTUKAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN.” Al-Qisth Law Review 6, no. 1 (2022): 52. https://doi.org/10.24853/al-qisth.6.1.52-83.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24853/al-qisth.6.1.52-83Aryani, Christina. “REFORMULASI SISTEM PEMBENTUKAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN MELALUI PENERAPAN OMNIBUS LAW.” JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW 4, no. 1 (2021): 27–48. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v4i1.3194.
Asshiddiqie, Jimly. Omnibus Law Dan Penerapannya Di Indonesia. Konstitusi Press, 2020.
Bappenas. Data RISPK. Bappenas, 2024.
Dianisa, Tifani Rizki, and Gayatri Dyah Suprobowati. “Penerapan Teori Legislasi Dalam Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia.” Souvereignty : Jurnal Demokrasi Dan Ketahanan Nasional: Jurnal Demokrasi Dan Ketahanan Nasiona 1 (2022): 298–305.
Dixon, Rosalind. “Responsive Judicial Review in Central & Eastern Europe.” Review of Central and East European Law 48 (2023): 375–402. https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-bja10093.
Dodek, Adam M. “Omnibus Bills : Constitutional Constraints and Legislative Liberations.” Ottawa Law Review 48, no. 1 (2017): 1–42.
Fadillah, Nor. “Analisis Metode Penafsiran Mahkamah Konstitusi Dalam Perumusan Putusan Nomor 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 Terkait Pengujian Formil Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 Tentang Cipta Kerja.” Jurnal Lex Renaissance 7, no. 4 (2022): 726–44. https://doi.org/10.20885/JLR.vol7.iss4.art4.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20885/JLR.vol7.iss4.art4Fioramonti, L., and A. Fiori. “The Changing Roles of Civil Society in Democratization: Evidence from South Africa (1990-2009) and South Korea (1987-2009).” African and Asian Studies 9, nos. 1–2 (2010): 83–104. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1163/156921010X491272.
Guswara, Arrafi Bima, and Ali Imran Nasution. “Dinamika Konstitusionalitas Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 Dan 54/PUU-XXI/2023.” JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW 6, no. 3 (2023): 1052–72. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i3.7844.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i3.7844Hilmy, Yunan. Kajian Awal Mengenai Implikasi Putusan MK No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 Terhadap Upaya Reformasi Regulasi. no. 91. PUSAT ANALISIS DAN EVALUASI HUKUM NASIONAL BADAN PEMBINAAN HUKUM NASIONAL KEMENTERIAN HUKUM DAN HAM RI, 2020.
Ibrahim, Johnny. Teori Dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum. Bayu Media, 2006.
Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW). Laporan Partisipasi Publik Dalam Legislasi. Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW, 2023.
Irawan, Atang. “Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja Di Tengah Himpitan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 91/PUU-XVIII/2020.” Jurnal Litigasi 23, no. 1 (2022): 101–33. https://dx.doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v23i1.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v23i1.4773Kim, J. “Upgrading Constitutionalism: The Ups and Downs of Constitutional Developments in South Korea Since 2000.” In Constitutionalism in Asia in the Early Twenty-First Century. Cambridge University Press, 2014. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107338333.005.
Kurniawan, I Gede Agus. “Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Terhadap Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja Dalam Perspektif Filsafat Utilitarianisme.” JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW 5, no. 1 (2022): 282–98. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v5i1.4941.
Leif Petersen, Matthew Gaylard. “Policy Brief Putusan MK 91 - Omnibus Law: Jeda Krisis Sementara.” In Pancanaka, vol. 1. no. September. Jakarta, 2019.
Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. Penelitian Hukum. Kencana, 2011.
OECD. Regulatory Impact Assessment Toolkit. 1st ed. OECD Publishing, n.d.
Pratama, Nur Aji. “MEANINGFUL PARTICIPATION SEBAGAI UPAYA KOMPROMI IDEE DES RECHT PASCA PUTUSAN MK NO. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020.” CREPIDO 4, no. 2 (2022): 137–47. https://doi.org/10.14710/crepido.4.2.137-147.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/crepido.4.2.137-147Pratiwi, S. “Partisipasi Publik Sebagai Hak Asasi Dalam Pembentukan Undang-Undang: Telaah Putusan MK No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020.” Jurnal Konstitusi 19, no. 3 (2022): 415–36.
Rishan, Idul. “Evaluasi Performa Legislasi Dalam Pembentukan Omnibus Law Cipta Kerja : Kajian Legisprudensi.” Undang: Jurnal Hukum 5, no. 1 (2022): 43–67. https://doi.org/10.22437/ujh.5.1.43-67.
Rishan, Idul. “Konsep Pengujian Formil Undang- Undang Di Mahkamah Konstitusi.” Jurnal Konstitusi 18, no. 1 (2021): 1–21.
Suhardin, Yohanes, and Henny Saida Flora. “Eksistensi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Pasca Disahkannya Undang-Undang Penetapan Perpu Cipta Kerja.” JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW 6, no. 1 (2023): 320–31. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i1.6307.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i1.6307United Nation. “Guidelines on Public Participation in Law-Making.” UNDP, 2019.
Villiers, B. de. “The Utility of Comparative Constitutional Law – the Practical Contribution by South Africa to a World Searching for Consistency in Democratic Practices.” Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe 18, no. 1 (2019): 1–19. Scopus.
Warjiyati, Sri, Zeti Nofita Sari, Nur Lailatul Musyafaah, and Dina Imam Supaat. “Implication of The Constitutional Court’s Decision No. 91/Puu-XVIII/2020 on The Formal Examination of Law No. 11 of 2020.” Jurnal Jurisprudence, December 30, 2024, 192–212. https://doi.org/10.23917/jurisprudence.v14i2.6297.
Wicaksono, Dian Agung. “QUO VADIS PENDIRIAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM MENGUJI UNDANG-UNDANG CIPTA KERJA DAN IMPLIKASINYA TERHADAP KEGAMANGAN PEMERINTAH DAERAH DALAM MELAKSANAKAN KEWENANGAN MENGATUR.” Jurnal Rechts Vinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional 11, no. 1 (2022): 77. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v11i1.846.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v11i1.846