Analysis of the Constitution Court Verdict Number 46/PUU-XIV/2016 about Morality Criminal

Ansori Ansori, Muhammad Fuad Zain

= http://dx.doi.org/10.20473/ydk.v34i2.9820
Abstract views = 425 times | views = 223 times

Abstract


Indonesian Family Loves Alliance sees that Penal Code in article 284, 285 and 295 related to adultery, rape and molestation (sacrilege or abuse) which is contrary to religious values and the morale of the Indonesian people deliver to sue the Constitutional Court through judicial review with results was rejected. Five judges with judicial restraint argue that the State must protect rights and freedoms, not vice versa, but four others with judicial activism argue that the State must protect the rights of citizens by referring to the living law with develops in society. With no expansion of the meaning of the article a quo then LGBT, adultery, rape and molestation cannot be convicted. This verdict has been troubling most of Indonesians who want a change in the legal system, considering the legislative process that began in 1963 until now did not come to fruition. So the People’s Consultative Assembly and the President as a positive legislator are required to immediately revise the laws and regulations in accordance with religious norms and common laws that develops in society to avoid the violence or vigilante action which actually harms the community itself.  


Keywords


Penal Code; Judicial Review; Judicial Restraint; Judicial Activism.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Albert H. Y. Chen, The Interpretation of the Basic Law-Common Law and Mainland Chinese Perspectives (Hong Kong Journal Ltd 2000).

Andi Hamzah, Asas-Asas Hukum Pidana (2nd edn, Rineka Cipta 1994).

Aris Hardinanto, ‘Manfaat Analogi Dalam Hukum Pidana Untuk Mengatasi Kejahatan Yang Mengalami Modernisasi’ (2016) 31 Yuridika.

Barda Nawawi Arief, Kebijakan Hukum Pidana; Perkembangan Penyusunan Konsep KUHP Baru (Kencana Prenada Media Group 2014).

Bisariyadi, ‘Penafsiran Konstitusi Dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang Terhadap UUD’ (2016)

Constitutional Court Number 46/PUU-XIV/2016 2017 453.

Dramanda W, ‘Menggagas Penerapan Judicial Restraint Di Mahkamah Konstitusi’ (2014) XI Jurnal Konstitusi.

Faiz PM, ‘Dimensi Judicial Activism Dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi’ (2016) XIII Jurnal Konstitusi.

—— ‘Judicial Restraint Vs Judicial Activism’ [2017] Mahkamah Konstitusi 8

Fat-Ash, ‘Putusan MK Berpengaruh Pada Hukum Waris’ Hukum Online (Jakarta, February 2012).

Kristian Erdianto, ‘Mahfud MD: Yang Kurang Paham, Menuduh MK Perbolehkan Zina Dan LGBT’ (Kompas, 2017) LINK accessed 13 January 2018.

Lalu Nugraha, ‘Juridical Analysis of MK Decision No: 46/PUU-XIV/2016 Concerning Expansion of Zina and LGBT Meanings’ (2018) 2 International Journal of Humanities, Religion and Social Science.

M.Saleem Ahmed Vignesh, ‘A Study on Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint in Indian Judiciary’ (2017) XX Humanities and Social Science.

Muchamad Ali Safa’at, ‘Penafsiran Konstitusi’ (2011)

Nanang Sri Darmadi, ‘Kedudukan Dan Wewenang Mahkamah Konstitusi Dalam Sistem Hukum Ketatanegaraan Indonesia’ (2015) 2 Pembaharuan Hukum.

Rosjidi Ranggawidjaja, Wewenang Manafsirkan Dan Mengubah Undang-Undang Dasar (Citra Bakti Akademika 1996).

Satjipto Rahardjo, Ilmu Hukum (Citra Aditya Bakti 2006).

Sudikno and A. Pitlo Mertokusumo, Bab-Bab Tentang Penemuan Hukum (Citra Aditya Bakti 1993).

Weldy Agiwinata, ‘Konvensi Ketatanegaraan Sebagai Batu Uji Dalam Pengujian Undang Undang Di Mahkamah Konstitusi’ (2014) 29 Yuridika.

Yasmine Aulia, ‘Kronologi Penangkapan Sepasang Muda-Mudi Mesum Di Dalam Masjid Di Tuntang’ Tribun Jateng (Semarang, April 2018).


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Yuridika

Yuridika (ISSN: 0215-840X | e-ISSN: 2528-3103) by http://e-journal.unair.ac.id/index.php/YDK/index under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Statcounter :

View My Stats

Yuridika has been indexed by:

 

Yuridika Official Partner :

 

Full Indexed Service