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

Nor Fadillah
{"title":"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","authors":"Nor Fadillah","doi":"10.20885/jlr.vol7.iss4.art4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Interpretation is one of the legal discovery methods that can provide a clearer explanation of the text of the law. The method of interpretation is a means or tool for understanding the meaning of the law, so that its justification lies in its usefulness for carrying out concrete provisions and not for the sake of the method itself. This paper aims to identify the method of interpretation used by judges in court and find out the method used by judges in interpreting the decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 on the formal review of Law Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation. The method used is a normative method which positions law as a system of norms for analyzing laws that have been decided by judges through court proceedings. The approach used is the law approach. Data sources come from secondary data sources with primary legal materials, namely Law Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation and Consitutional Court Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 and secondary law, which are law books and journal articles. Technical data analysis is content analysis which is presented with analytical descriptive. The results of this study indicate that the method of interpretation used by Constitutional Court Judges in interpreting Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 regarding the formal review of Law Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation is a method of systematic interpretation, doctrinal interpretation, and sociological interpretation.","PeriodicalId":141165,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Lex Renaissance","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Lex Renaissance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20885/jlr.vol7.iss4.art4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Interpretation is one of the legal discovery methods that can provide a clearer explanation of the text of the law. The method of interpretation is a means or tool for understanding the meaning of the law, so that its justification lies in its usefulness for carrying out concrete provisions and not for the sake of the method itself. This paper aims to identify the method of interpretation used by judges in court and find out the method used by judges in interpreting the decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 on the formal review of Law Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation. The method used is a normative method which positions law as a system of norms for analyzing laws that have been decided by judges through court proceedings. The approach used is the law approach. Data sources come from secondary data sources with primary legal materials, namely Law Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation and Consitutional Court Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 and secondary law, which are law books and journal articles. Technical data analysis is content analysis which is presented with analytical descriptive. The results of this study indicate that the method of interpretation used by Constitutional Court Judges in interpreting Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 regarding the formal review of Law Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation is a method of systematic interpretation, doctrinal interpretation, and sociological interpretation.
宪法法院根据2020年《宪法》第91条/PUU-XVIII/2020条对版权法第11条的测试方法进行分析
解释是一种能够对法律文本提供更清晰解释的法律发现方法。解释方法是理解法律含义的一种手段或工具,因此其正当性在于其对执行具体规定的有用性,而不是为了方法本身。本文旨在确定法官在法庭上使用的解释方法,并找出法官在解释第91/PUU-XVIII/2020号关于对2020年第11号关于创造就业的法律进行正式审查的决定时使用的方法。所使用的方法是一种规范方法,将法律定位为一种规范系统,用于分析法官通过法院诉讼程序决定的法律。使用的方法是法律方法。数据来源来自次要数据来源和主要法律材料,即2020年第11号关于创造就业的法律和宪法法院第91/PUU-XVIII/2020号决定,以及次要法律,即法律书籍和期刊文章。技术数据分析是内容分析,以分析性描述的方式呈现。本研究结果表明,宪法法院法官在解释第91/PUU-XVIII/2020号决定时所使用的解释方法是一种系统解释、理论解释和社会学解释的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信