BibTex Citation Data :
@article{LR30305, author = {Madaskolay Dahoklory and Fifiana Wisnaeni}, title = {Binding Legal Force of Supreme Court Decision over General Election Commission}, journal = {LAW REFORM}, volume = {16}, number = {1}, year = {2020}, keywords = {Supreme Court’s Decision; Judicial Review; The Election Commission Regulations}, abstract = { Election Commission Regulation Number 26 Year 2018 established by the General Election Commission as a Follow-up to the Constitutional Court Decision Number 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018 which basically prohibits candidates for Regional Representative Council who are concurrently acting as administrators of political parties but the General Election Commission's rules are canceled by the Supreme Court based on its decision Number 65 / P / HUM / 2018. The purpose of this study is to analyze and find out whether the Supreme Court's Decision has binding legal force over the General Election Commission. The research method used is juridical-normative and qualitative analysis. The research results show that the Supreme Court Decision which nullifies legal norms in the General Election Commission Regulation still has binding legal force because in principle every judge's decision must be considered valid according to the law until there is equipment (res judicata pro veritate habetur), as well as the juridical decision of the Supreme Court immediately published in the State news, with the enactment of the Supreme Court's Decision it would naturally become the basis for the validity of the a quo Decision. The decision issued by the Supreme Court indirectly gave birth to a legal obligation for the General Election Commission, for that the General Election Commission must carry it out properly. Therefore, the Election Supervisory Body needs to oversee the election commission in carrying out the mandate of the decision. }, issn = {2580-8508}, pages = {58--69} doi = {10.14710/lr.v16i1.30305}, url = {https://ejournal.undip.ac.id/index.php/lawreform/article/view/30305} }
Refworks Citation Data :
Election Commission Regulation Number 26 Year 2018 established by the General Election Commission as a Follow-up to the Constitutional Court Decision Number 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018 which basically prohibits candidates for Regional Representative Council who are concurrently acting as administrators of political parties but the General Election Commission's rules are canceled by the Supreme Court based on its decision Number 65 / P / HUM / 2018. The purpose of this study is to analyze and find out whether the Supreme Court's Decision has binding legal force over the General Election Commission. The research method used is juridical-normative and qualitative analysis. The research results show that the Supreme Court Decision which nullifies legal norms in the General Election Commission Regulation still has binding legal force because in principle every judge's decision must be considered valid according to the law until there is equipment (res judicata pro veritate habetur), as well as the juridical decision of the Supreme Court immediately published in the State news, with the enactment of the Supreme Court's Decision it would naturally become the basis for the validity of the a quo Decision. The decision issued by the Supreme Court indirectly gave birth to a legal obligation for the General Election Commission, for that the General Election Commission must carry it out properly. Therefore, the Election Supervisory Body needs to oversee the election commission in carrying out the mandate of the decision.
Article Metrics:
Last update:
The Educational Role of The Constitutional Court in Compliance of Indonesian Citizens
Last update: 2024-11-21 13:24:29
The Authors submitting a manuscript do so on the understanding that if accepted for publication, copyright of the article shall be assigned to Law Reform and Master Program of Law, Diponegoro University as publisher of the journal. Copyright encompasses rights to reproduce and deliver the article in all form and media, including reprints, photographs, microfilms, and any other similar reproductions, as well as translations.
Law Reform and Master Program of Law, Diponegoro University and the Editors make every effort to ensure that no wrong or misleading data, opinions or statements be published in the journal. In any way, the contents of the articles and advertisements published in Law Reform journal are the sole and exclusive responsibility of their respective authors and advertisers.
The Copyright Transfer Form can be downloaded here: [Copyright Transfer Form Law Reform]. The copyright form should be signed originally and send to the Editorial Office in the form of original mail, scanned document or fax :
Dr. Kholis Roisah, S.H., M.Hum (Editor-in-Chief)
Editorial Office of Law Reform
Master of Law, Faculty of Law, Universitas Diponegoro
Jl. Imam Bardjo, SH No.1, Semarang, Indonesia 50241
Telp. (024) 8313493
Email: jurnalmih.undip@gmail.com
Has been indexed in:
Statistics
LAW REFORM (p-ISSN:1858-4810, e-ISSN:2580-8508) is published by Master Program of Law, Faculty of Law, Universitas Diponegoro under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.