English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Dalam pelaksanaan pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi, satu dinamika yang terjadi adalah digunakannya klausul bersyarat melalui putusan konstitusional bersyarat (conditionally constitutional) maupun inkonstitusional bersyarat (conditionally unconstitutional). Lebih lanjut, penggunaan jenis putusan bersyarat rupanya juga memiliki dinamikanya tersendiri, terutama berkaitan dengan pemaknaan terhadap klausul bersyarat. Hal ini dapat ditunjukkan dengan adanya putusan yang mencantumkan klausul konstitusional bersyarat dalam pertimbangan hukumnya, tetapi dalam amar putusannya dinyatakan inkonstitusional bersyarat. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, penelitian ini ditujukan untuk memahami penerapan putusan bersyarat dalam pengujian undang-undang, serta memahami bagaimana anomali penggunaan klausul bersyarat dalam putusan pengujian undang-undang, serta apa yang dapat dilakukan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi untuk mencegah terjadinya anomali tersebut. Hasil analisis yang dilakukan Penulis menunjukkan tiga hal yang perlu diperhatikan. Pertama, anomali tersebut semakin menunjukkan bahwa tidak terdapat perbedaan substansial antara klausul konstitusional bersyarat dengan inkonstitusional bersyarat. Kedua, penggunaan klausul konstitusional bersyarat dalam ratio decidendi terlihat tidak memberikan dampak substansial terhadap pelaksanaan putusan. Ketiga, ketujuh putusan tersebut mempertegas pandangan Mahkamah Konstitusi bahwa penggunaan amar putusan inkonstitusional bersyarat dianggap lebih efektif dalam penerapannya.In the implementation of constitutional review by the Constitutional Court, one of the dynamics occur is the emergence of conditionally constitutional unconstitutional decisions. Furthermore, the utilization of these types of decisions also has its dynamics, especially concerning the interpretation of conditional decisions. It can be indicated by the existence of anomalies decisions, which in the legal consideration, states that the norms reviewed are conditionally constitutional, but in its verdict, the norms are declared conditionally unconstitutional. Therefore, this paper aimed to comprehend the utilization of conditional decisions in constitutional review and to understand how is the anomaly in conditional clause implementation, as well as what Constitutional Court can do to prevent the anomalies to occur. Based on the analysis of conditional decision’s anomalies, there are at least three points that need to be pointed out. First, the anomalies increasingly show that conditionally constitutional and conditionally unconstitutional are substantially the same. Second, the use of conditionally constitutional clause as a ratio decidendi is considered to have no impact on the implementation of decisions. Third, the seven decisions analyzed further emphasized the Constitutional Court views that conditionally constitutional clause is deemed to be more effective in the implementation.

Anomali Penerapan Klausul Bersyarat dalam Putusan Pengujian Undang-Undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar