司法干预——区域:宪法法院的惯例研究

Titon Slamet Kurnia
{"title":"司法干预——区域:宪法法院的惯例研究","authors":"Titon Slamet Kurnia","doi":"10.25123/vej.v7i1.4081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The legal issue to be discussed in this article is the involvement of the Constitutional Court in adjudicating issues concerning the relationship between national – local government in general, and the distribution of power to the local government in particular. To be more specific, this article will criticise by delivering a casenote over the Constitutional Court decisions, i.e. Decision Number 87/PUU-XIII/2015, Decision Number 137/PUU-XIII/2015, Decision Number 30/PUU-XIV/2016 and Decision Number 56/PUU-XIV/2016. The casenote will notify the need to a deeper conceptual understanding of the differences between unitary State and federalism principles and its implication in giving prescriptions. This is a response to the Constitutional Court’s judicial opinion which tends weightier to federalism, instead of unitary State principle. According to this situation, it is recommended that the Constitutional Court should not review the constitutionality of laws which contain the legal issues concerning the relationship between national – local government in general, and the distribution of power to the local government in particular. This article uses conceptual and comparative approaches.","PeriodicalId":32446,"journal":{"name":"Veritas et Justitia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"INTERVENSI YUDISIAL DALAM ISU HUBUNGAN PUSAT–DAERAH: STUDI TERHADAP PRAKTIK MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI\",\"authors\":\"Titon Slamet Kurnia\",\"doi\":\"10.25123/vej.v7i1.4081\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The legal issue to be discussed in this article is the involvement of the Constitutional Court in adjudicating issues concerning the relationship between national – local government in general, and the distribution of power to the local government in particular. To be more specific, this article will criticise by delivering a casenote over the Constitutional Court decisions, i.e. Decision Number 87/PUU-XIII/2015, Decision Number 137/PUU-XIII/2015, Decision Number 30/PUU-XIV/2016 and Decision Number 56/PUU-XIV/2016. The casenote will notify the need to a deeper conceptual understanding of the differences between unitary State and federalism principles and its implication in giving prescriptions. This is a response to the Constitutional Court’s judicial opinion which tends weightier to federalism, instead of unitary State principle. According to this situation, it is recommended that the Constitutional Court should not review the constitutionality of laws which contain the legal issues concerning the relationship between national – local government in general, and the distribution of power to the local government in particular. This article uses conceptual and comparative approaches.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Veritas et Justitia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Veritas et Justitia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25123/vej.v7i1.4081\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veritas et Justitia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25123/vej.v7i1.4081","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文要讨论的法律问题是宪法法院在裁决有关国家与地方政府关系的问题,特别是地方政府的权力分配问题中的参与。更具体地说,本文将通过对宪法法院判决的案例进行批评,即第87/PUU-XIII/2015号决定、第137/PUU-XIII/2015号决定、第30/PUU-XIV/2016号决定和第56/PUU-XIV/2016号决定。案例笔记将通知需要对单一制国家和联邦制原则之间的差异及其在开处方方面的含义有更深入的概念理解。这是对宪法法院的司法意见的回应,该意见更倾向于联邦制,而不是单一制原则。在这种情况下,建议宪法法院不要对涉及国家与地方政府关系、特别是地方政府权力分配等法律问题的法律进行合宪性审查。本文采用概念和比较的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
INTERVENSI YUDISIAL DALAM ISU HUBUNGAN PUSAT–DAERAH: STUDI TERHADAP PRAKTIK MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI
The legal issue to be discussed in this article is the involvement of the Constitutional Court in adjudicating issues concerning the relationship between national – local government in general, and the distribution of power to the local government in particular. To be more specific, this article will criticise by delivering a casenote over the Constitutional Court decisions, i.e. Decision Number 87/PUU-XIII/2015, Decision Number 137/PUU-XIII/2015, Decision Number 30/PUU-XIV/2016 and Decision Number 56/PUU-XIV/2016. The casenote will notify the need to a deeper conceptual understanding of the differences between unitary State and federalism principles and its implication in giving prescriptions. This is a response to the Constitutional Court’s judicial opinion which tends weightier to federalism, instead of unitary State principle. According to this situation, it is recommended that the Constitutional Court should not review the constitutionality of laws which contain the legal issues concerning the relationship between national – local government in general, and the distribution of power to the local government in particular. This article uses conceptual and comparative approaches.
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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信