Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 48 Download : 50

Main Article Content

Abstract

The 2024 Presidential and Vice Presidential PHPU case contained a dissenting opinion, which had never happened before. This research aims to analyze the dissenting opinions of Constitutional Court Judges in the PHPU dispute for the President and Vice President and the implications of the dissenting opinion for the upcoming election. The research method is normative juridical. The type of data used is secondary data. The data analysis technique uses a data interpretation method with deductive reasoning which is presented descriptively. The results of this research are: first, the Dissenting opinion of the Constitutional Court Judge in the 2024 Presidential and Vice Presidential PHPU case, namely: Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra assessed that the distribution of social assistance during elections has the potential to cause a conflict of interest, so that the Petitioner's petition relating to social assistance is legally grounded; Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat, based on systematic and grammatical interpretation, is of the opinion that the President/Vice President's right to campaign is used when the President/Vice President pair becomes the President/Vice President candidate pair in an election contest; Constitutional Justice Enny Nurbaningsih believes that there has been non-neutrality of officials in several regions, so the Court should order re-voting for several of these regions. Second, the implications of dissenting opinions on the upcoming election can be used as a basis for the implementation of future elections, so that there are improvements both in terms of regulations, institutions and implementation that must be carried out by legislators and election organizers in order to increase the integrity and credibility of elections.

Keywords

Constitutional Court Dissenting Opinion Elections PHPU President

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2024 M. Giovani Fernanda, Lego Karjoko, Hari Purwadi

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

References

  1. Asshiddiqie, Jimly. 2012. Hukum Acara Pengujian Undang-Undang. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
  2. —. 2006. Hukum Pengujian Undang-Undang. Jakarta: Penerbit Sekjen dan Kepaniteraan MK RI.
  3. Konstitusi, Tim Penyusun Hukum Acara Mahkamah. 2010. Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi. Jakarta: Sekretariat Jenderal dan kepaniteraan MKRI.
  4. Soekanto, Soerjono, dan Sri Mamudji. 2013. Penelitian Hukum Normatif, Suatu Tinjauan Singkat. Depok: PT. Rajagrafindo.
  5. Wijayanta, Tata, and Hery Firmansyah. 2011. Perbedaan Pendapat dalam Putusan Pengadilan. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Yustisia.
  6. Yusa, I Gede. 2011. Demokrasi HAM & Konstitusi: Perspektif Negara-Bangsa untuk Menghadirkan Keadilan. Malang: Setara Press.
  7. Alamalibari, Khotob Tobi, Abdul Aziz, and Adrian Febriansyah. n.d. "Kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Sistem Pemilihan Umum." Jurnal Rechten: Riset Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia 3, no. 1 (2021). https://rechten.nusaputra.ac.id/article/download/21/9.
  8. Banafanu. n.d. "Kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Pemilihan Umum di Indonesia." Jurnal Hukum Online 1, no. 7 (2023). https://jurnalhukumonline.com/index.php/JHO/article/view/282/297.
  9. Effendi. n.d. "Pembatasan Kekuasaan Berdasarkan Paham Konstitusionalisme di Negara Demokrasi." Politica: Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara dan Politik Islam 7, no. 2 (2020). https://doi.org/10.32505/politica.v7i2.1990.
  10. Firdaus, Sunny Ummul, Putri Anjelina Nataly Panjaitan, and Rizky Kurniyanto Widyasasmito. n.d. "Peran Dissenting Opinion Hakim Konstitusi Dalam Pembaharuan Hukum Nasional." Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure 20, no. 1 (2020). https://ejournal.balitbangham.go.id/index.php/dejure/article/view/938.
  11. Hogg, Peter W., and Ravi Amarnath. n.d. "Why Judger Should Dissent." University of Toronto Law Journal 67, no. 2 (2017). https://www.utpjournals.press/doi/abs/10.3138/UTLJ.4216.
  12. Prajatama, Hangga. n.d. "Kedudukan Dissenting Opinion sebagai Upaya Kebebasan Hakim untuk Mencari Keadilan di Indonesia." Jurnal Verstek 2, no. 1 (2014). https://jurnal.uns.ac.id/verstek/article/download/38837/25711.
  13. Simanjuntak, Louis Fernando, Elis Rusmiati, and Budi Arta. n.d. "Dissenting Opinion oleh Hakim dalam Proses Pengambilan Putusan Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi sebagai Wujud Kebebasan Hakim." Jurnal Mercatoria 16, no. 1 (2023). https://ojs.uma.ac.id/index.php/mercatoria/article/view/8915.
  14. Sonata, Depri Liber. n.d. "Metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris: Karakteristik Khas dari Metode Meneliti Hukum." Fiat Justisia Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 8, no. 1 (2014). https://jurnal.fh.unila.ac.id/index.php/fiat/article/download/283/349/1238.
  15. Sugiarto, Kantrey, and Heru Drajat Sulistyo. n.d. "Dissenting Opinion Hakim Mahkamah Konstitusi Terhadap Pembatalan Peraturan Daerah Kabupaten/Kota oleh Menteri Dalam Negeri Dikaitkan dengan Pasal 24A ayat (1) UUD 1945 (Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor: 137/PUU-XIII/2015)." Yustisia Merdeka 5, no. 2 (2019). https://yustisia.unmermadiun.ac.id/index.php/yustisia/article/view/38.
  16. Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945
  17. Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman
  18. Undang-Undang Nomor 23 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi
  19. Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2017 tentang pemilu
  20. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 1/PHPU.PRES-XXII/2024 dan Nomor 2/PHPU.PRES-XXII/2024 mengenai Perselisihan Hasil Pemilihan Umum Presiden dan Wakil Presiden Tahun 2024.
  21. Perludem. 2024. Ada Secercah Harapan dalam Putusan MK untuk PHPU Pilpes. April 25. https://perludem.org/2024/04/25/perludem-ada-secercah-harapan-dalam-putusan-mk-untuk-phpu-pilpres/, diakses tanggal 29 April 2024.