Constitutionalized But Not Constitute: The Case of Right to Social Security in Indonesia

Q4 Social Sciences
Stefanus Hendrianto
{"title":"Constitutionalized But Not Constitute: The Case of Right to Social Security in Indonesia","authors":"Stefanus Hendrianto","doi":"10.31078/consrev623","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous studies on the development of socio-economic rights in Indonesia heavily focus on the Constitutional Court’s decisions in upholding the rights. But there is still minimum study on the political economy behind the development of socio-economic rights in Indonesia. This article will analyze the development of socio-economic rights through the lenses of the right to social security. This article relies on two major theoretical frameworks to analyze the development of the right to social security in Indonesia. The first theoretical framework is the authoritarian constitutionalism in the economic sphere. The second theoretical framework in this article is Kathrine Young’s theory of the construction of socio-economic rights. This article postulates that the rights to social security has been constitutionalized but not constituted in Indonesia for several reasons. First, and foremost, the legacy of authoritarian constitutionalism that prioritizing economic growth over the fulfilment of social economic rights. The “growth” ideology has contributed to the discrepancy between the constitution and reality, in which the government merely considers protection of socio-economic rights as extra cost, which will hamper the growth of the economy. Second, the lack of philosophical and comparative analysis in the interpretation of rights to social security. Third, the transformation of the Court as a detached court in the enforcement of the rights to social security. The element of detachment is clearly seen in the Court’s too much deferral to the Executive and Legislative branches in defining the scope and meaning of the right to social security. Finally, the failure of social movement to create a new narrative on injustice and the importance of rights to social security.","PeriodicalId":32640,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Constitutional Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31078/consrev623","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Previous studies on the development of socio-economic rights in Indonesia heavily focus on the Constitutional Court’s decisions in upholding the rights. But there is still minimum study on the political economy behind the development of socio-economic rights in Indonesia. This article will analyze the development of socio-economic rights through the lenses of the right to social security. This article relies on two major theoretical frameworks to analyze the development of the right to social security in Indonesia. The first theoretical framework is the authoritarian constitutionalism in the economic sphere. The second theoretical framework in this article is Kathrine Young’s theory of the construction of socio-economic rights. This article postulates that the rights to social security has been constitutionalized but not constituted in Indonesia for several reasons. First, and foremost, the legacy of authoritarian constitutionalism that prioritizing economic growth over the fulfilment of social economic rights. The “growth” ideology has contributed to the discrepancy between the constitution and reality, in which the government merely considers protection of socio-economic rights as extra cost, which will hamper the growth of the economy. Second, the lack of philosophical and comparative analysis in the interpretation of rights to social security. Third, the transformation of the Court as a detached court in the enforcement of the rights to social security. The element of detachment is clearly seen in the Court’s too much deferral to the Executive and Legislative branches in defining the scope and meaning of the right to social security. Finally, the failure of social movement to create a new narrative on injustice and the importance of rights to social security.
宪法化而不构成:印尼社会保障权案例
以往关于印度尼西亚社会经济权利发展的研究主要集中在宪法法院维护这些权利的决定上。但对印度尼西亚社会经济权利发展背后的政治经济学研究仍然很少。本文将从社会保障权的角度来分析社会经济权利的发展。本文以两个主要的理论框架来分析印度尼西亚社会保障权的发展。第一个理论框架是经济领域的专制宪政。本文的第二个理论框架是杨的社会经济权利建构理论。该条假定,社会保障权利在印度尼西亚已被宪法化,但由于几个原因而没有构成。首先,也是最重要的是,独裁宪政的遗产,即将经济增长置于社会经济权利的实现之上。“增长”意识形态导致了宪法和现实之间的差异,在宪法和现实中,政府只将保护社会经济权利视为额外成本,这将阻碍经济增长。第二,对社会保障权利的解释缺乏哲学和比较分析。第三,将法院转变为一个独立的法院,行使社会保障权利。法院在界定社会保障权的范围和含义时过于拖延行政和立法部门,这清楚地表明了超然的因素。最后,社会运动未能创造一种关于不公正和权利对社会保障重要性的新叙事。
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
Constitutional Review
Constitutional Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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