Analisis Pembubaran Ormas Tanpa Proses Peradilan Pasca Penetapan UU No. 16 Tahun 2017 Tentang Ormas
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35719/rch.v1i2.27Keywords:
Social Organization, Constitutionality, Rule of LawAbstract
The background of the amendment to the Law on Community Organization was due to the inadequacy of regulations regarding the problems that existed at that time. Changes in the regulation of the dissolution of community organizations without due process of law which are replaced by the principle of contrario actus constitute a matter that needs to be reviewed on a constitutional basis in a state that declares a state of law (rechtstaat) and not a power state (machtstaat). The focus of the problems examined in this thesis are: 1) What is the background of the emergence of Law Number 16 of 2017 concerning Community Organizations? 2) What is the constitutionality of the authority to dissolve community organizations without a judicial process? The objectives of this study are: 1) Describe the background of the emergence of the Law on Community Organization and the critical analysis of researchers towards this Law. 2) Describe the analysis of the constitutionality of the authority to dissolve community organizations without a judicial process. To identify these problems, this study uses normative legal research which is a qualitative analysis using a statute approach, a conceptual approach, and a case approach. This research draws the following conclusions: 1) The old regulation is no longer adequate, so it demands an amendment to the Law. 2) The policy to dissolve the organization without a judicial process is an unconstitutional policy.
References
Budi, Andhi Setya, dkk, Kedudukan Undang-Undang Keormasan Terhadap Kehidupan Berdemokrasi Di Indonesia. Naskah hukum.
Yuslim. 2015. Hukum Acara Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara. Jakarta: Sinar grafika.
Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. 2009. Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana.
Meleong, Lexy. 2003. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: CV.Rosda Karya.
MD, Moh. Mahfud. 2018. Politik Hukum di Indonesia. Depok: Rajawali Pers.
Astawa, I Gde Pantja, Suprin Na?a, 2012. Dinamika Hukum dan Ilmu Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia. Bandung: P.T ALUMNI.
Shapiro, Martin, Stone Sweet, Alec. 2002. on Law, Politics, and Judicializations, New York: Oxford.
Asshiddiqie, Jimly. 2004. Konstitusi dan Konstitusionalisme Indonesia, Jakarta: Konstitusi Press.
Kelsen, Hans, 1949. General Theory of Law. London: Oxford University Press.
Garner, Bryan A., 2010. Black?s Law Dictionary Ninth Edition. St. PaulMinn: West Publishing co.
Reksodiputro, Mardjono. 1994. Hak Asasi Manusia Dalam Peradilan Pidana. Jakarta: Pusat Pelayanan Keadilan dan Pengabdian Hukum.
Budiarjo, Miriam. 2008. Dasar-Dasar Ilmu Politik. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
Bambang Arwanto, “Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Rakyat Akibat Tindakan Faktual Pemerintah”, Jurnal Yuridika, Vol. 31 No. 3 September 2016.
Jurnal Penelitian Hukum, “Politik Hukum Dan Konstitusionalitas Kewenangan Pembubaran Organisasi Kemasyarakatan, Berbadan Hukum Oleh Pemerintah”. No: 30/E/KPT/2018, 446.
Rahmat Efendi Al Amin Siregar, “Due Process of Law dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia Kaitannya dengan Perlindungan HAM”, Jurnal Ilmiah Fitrah, Vol. 1, 2015
Atip Latipulhayat, “Due Process of Law”, Jurnal Hukum Padjajaran, Vol. 4 No. 2, 2017
Sudjito, Membaca “Kepentingan Politik” di balik Perpu ormas dan Implikasi sosiologisnya pada masyarakat, makalah dalam seminar nasional: QUO VADIS PERPPU ORMAS, diselenggarakan oleh FH UII, R. Sidang utama Lt. 3.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi 6-3-20/PUU-VIII/2010 tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2004 tentang Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Nur Aji Pratama

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.