Judicial Review and Civil Society Oversight: Synergy in Realizing a Demo-cratic Constitutional Court (Study of Constitutional Court Decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35335/legal.v14i1.1261Keywords:
Judicial Review, Constitutional Court Decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023, Amicus CuriaeAbstract
The intervention of political power in judicial review has a significant impact on the constitutional court, which is considered to disrupt the independence of constitutional judges and the pattern of constitutional interpretation in line with power. Although, the resulting decision opens up opportunities for people's constitutional rights, it does not fully favour the power of the community as a counterweight in judicial review. The research method used is normative juridical with a conceptual approach, a statutory approach and a case approach to Constitutional Court Decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023. This study aims to analyze Judicial Review and civil society oversight that work together in realizing democratic judicial decisions in the midst of political forces that intervene in constitutional courts in Indonesia. The results show that in a judicial review that has been intervened by political forces, public access to the judicial review process has been controlled by political interests. Therefore, the importance of special arrangements regarding the amicus curiae mechanism of public participation is a form of democratic control in a state of law to provide opinions as additional considerations for judges which should be part of the formal procedures in judicial review. This is done while still ensuring the protection of the constitutional rights of the community actively and objectively in the decisions produced by the Constitutional Court.
Downloads
References
Abdurrachman, H., Hamzani, A. I., & Majestya, N. (2021). From Judge’S Decision To Justice: the Role of Transcendental Law To Reinforce Judicial Independence. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 24(3), 1–13.
Baehaqi, J. (2016). Perspektif Penegakan Hukum Progresif dalam Judicial Review di Mahkamah Konstitusi. Jurnal Konstitusi, 10(3), 417. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1033
Fallon, R. H. (2003). Marbury and the constitutional mind: A bicentennial essay on the wages of doctrinal tension. California Law Review, 91(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.2307/3481382
Hallebone, E., & Priest, J. (2009). Business and Management Research. Business and Management Research, 121(Inclar 2019), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-11078-7
Hameed, J. A., Saeed, A. T., & Rajab, M. H. (2018). Design and analysis of hydroelectric generation using waterwheel. 2018 9th International Renewable Energy Congress, IREC 2018, 17788781(May), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/IREC.2018.8362443
Huda, N. (2008). Urgensi Judicial Review dalam Tata Hukum Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM, 15(1), 101–120. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol15.iss1.art5
Kelilauw, A. A., & Firmantoro, Z. A. (2024). Analisis Legal Standing dan Konsistensi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Pen-gujian Materiil UU Nomor 7 Tahun 2017 tentang Pemilihan Umum: Studi Kasus Putusan No.90/PUU-XXI/2023. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora Dan Politik, 4(2), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.38035/jihhp.v4i2.1856
Kholiq, A. (2023). Amicus Curiae: Position and Role in Issuing Decisions by Judges as an Effort to Achieve Substantive Justice. Veteran Law Review, 6(2), 164–175. https://doi.org/10.35586/velrev.v6i2.6713
Krislov, S., Kearney, S. J. D., Merrill, T. W., Court, S., Shelton, S. D., Proceedings, J., Bartholomeusz, L., Amicus, T., Before, C., & Courts, I. (2009). Amici Curiae in Civil Law Jurisdictions.
Lailam, T. (2014). Dalam Pengujian Konstitusionalitas Undang- Undang Terhadap Undang-. Jurnal Media Hukum, 21(1), 88–106.
Mudatsir, A., & Samsuri. (2023). Melacak Kerancuan Legal Reasoning dalam Putusan MK 90/PUU-XXI/2023: Analisis dengan Metode IRAC. Peradaban Journal of Law and Society, 2(2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.59001/pjls.v2i2.132
Muhammad Reza Winata. (2020). Pengujian konstitusionalitas undang-undang?: Rigitas tindak lanjut dalam pembentukan un-dang-undang . August 2020, 17.
Mulyadi, D., & Megawati, L. (2024). Constitutional Court Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 In the Dynamic Quo Vadis of Indonesian Law Rechtsstate of Machtsstate. Intellectual Law Review (ILRE), 2(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.59108/ilre.v2i1.58
Nainggolan, I. L., & Nina Zainab. (2024). Constitutional Values And Judges Morals In The Decision of The Constitutional Court Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023: Review of The Flow of Natural Law. Krtha Bhayangkara, 18(1), 167–180. https://doi.org/10.31599/krtha.v18i1.783
Nurdiyanti, E. P., Rohmah, F. G. N., Kusumaningtyas, M., & Santoso, A. P. A. (2024). Authority of Amicus Curiae in Constitutional proceedings?: Bridging Society and the Constitutional Court. West Science Law and Human Rights, 2(03), 218–224. https://doi.org/10.58812/wslhr.v2i03.970
Safjan, M. (2009). Politics - And constitutional courts (judge’s personal perspective). Polish Sociological Review, IX(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1123406
Schwarzenbach, R. P., Gschwend, P. M., & Imboden, D. M. (2016). Environmental organic chemistry. John Wiley & Sons.
Skuratov, Y. I., Yastrebova, A. I., & Dzhavakhyan, R. M. (2022). Judiciary and Civil Society in Provision of Constitutional Rule of Law in the Russian Federation. Kutafin Law Review, 9(4), 641–663. https://doi.org/10.17803/2313-5395.2022.4.22.641-663
Southard, B. F. S. (2007). Prudential Argumentation and John Marshall’s Opinion in Marbury V. Madison (1803). Argumentation and Advocacy, 44(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.2007.11821674
Stöcker, C., Bennett, R., Nex, F., Gerke, M., & Zevenbergen, J. (2017). Review of the current state of UAV regulations. Remote Sensing, 9(5), 459.
Widagdo Eddyono, L. (2017). Independence of the Indonesian Constitutional Court in Norms and Practices. Constitutional Review, 3(1). http://www.ialsnet.org/meetings/constit/papers/
Zurn, C. F. (2007). Deliberative democracy and the institutions of judicial review. Cambridge University Press, 1–366. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511498749
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 LEGAL BRIEF
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
