Titon Slamet Kurnia
{"title":"MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI SEBAGAI ELECTION COURT: REFLEKSI TEORETIS","authors":"Titon Slamet Kurnia","doi":"10.24246/JRH.2018.V3.I1.P33-48","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Constitution of Indonesia (UUD NRI 1945) confers authority to the Constitutional Court to decide disputes on the results of general elections. Theoretically, this authority develops the Constitutional Court as the election court. According to this background, this article proposes a theoretical reflection over the Constitutional Court’s role as the election court. The main issue is theoretical reflection on judging. The theory is normative because it claims about what should the Constitutional Court do instead of what did the Constitutional Court do. As the principle, it suggests prudentiality first and judicial activism second. This theory is to criticize, and then to correct, the Constitutional Court practices as the election court in the past.","PeriodicalId":202448,"journal":{"name":"Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24246/JRH.2018.V3.I1.P33-48","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

《印度尼西亚宪法》(UUD NRI 1945)授权宪法法院裁决有关大选结果的争端。从理论上讲,这种权力将宪法法院发展为选举法院。在此背景下,本文对宪法法院作为选举法院的作用进行了理论反思。主要问题是对判断的理论反思。该理论主张的是宪法法院应该做什么,而不是宪法法院做了什么,因此具有规范性。作为原则,它建议审慎第一,司法能动第二。这是对宪法裁判所过去作为选举裁判所的行为进行批判和纠正的理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI SEBAGAI ELECTION COURT: REFLEKSI TEORETIS
The Constitution of Indonesia (UUD NRI 1945) confers authority to the Constitutional Court to decide disputes on the results of general elections. Theoretically, this authority develops the Constitutional Court as the election court. According to this background, this article proposes a theoretical reflection over the Constitutional Court’s role as the election court. The main issue is theoretical reflection on judging. The theory is normative because it claims about what should the Constitutional Court do instead of what did the Constitutional Court do. As the principle, it suggests prudentiality first and judicial activism second. This theory is to criticize, and then to correct, the Constitutional Court practices as the election court in the past.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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