Dalam penyelenggaraan pemerintahan desa memiliki dua lembaga yang sangat penting yang pertama kepala desa dan Badan Permusyawaratan Desa (BPD). BPD berperan sebagai mitra dari kepala desa dalam menjalankan pemerintahan desa serta dalam membentuk peraturan desa. BPD memiliki fungsi sebagai penyalur aspirasi masyarakat desa serta memiliki tugas menggali aspirasi masyarakat desa. BPD dipilih melalui dua cara yaitu dengan musyawarah keterwakilan dan pemilihan langsung. Dalam proses pemilihan BPD sering terjadi kecurangan yang dilakukan oleh beberapa pihak, dan mengakibatkan calon anggota BPD yang mencalonkan diri dirugikan haknya. contohnya kecurangan terjadi di Desa Jaten Kabupaten Karanganyar, Desa Kalaena Kabupaten Luwu Timur dan Desa Karya Mukti Kabupaten Batanghari. Dengan kerugian yang dialami calon anggota BPD tersebut, mereka melakukan sebuah upaya untuk menegakkan nilai-nilai keadilan. Setiap orang memiliki hak untuk berpolitik, termasuk calon anggota BPD yang mencalonkan dirinya merupakan realisasi dari hak berpolitik. Apabila hak berpolitik seseorang dirugikan tentunya seseorang tersebut dapat melakukan sebuah upaya hukum untuk mendapatkan keadilan. Upaya yang dapat dilakukan oleh para calon anggota yang merasa dirugikan dapat dilakukan melalui mekanisme hukum (litigasi) ataupun non-lititgasi.
<p><em>Bank Secrecy remains as one of the most essential principles of banking. In Indonesia, however, this principle is not absolute. According to Article 40 (1) of Law No.10 of the Year 1998 regarding changes to Law Number 7 of the Year 1992 regarding Banking alongside Article 2 (4) of Bank Indonesia Number : 2/19/PBI/2000 regarding several exceptions in implementing Bank Secrecy. In its implementation, these exceptions have yet to adjust to recent social development. One problematic case is when it relates to a claim of combined assets that is filed in conjunction with a claim for divorce. In recent development, the Constitutional Court has asserted that the one of the exceptions for Bank Secrecy can occur for cases of divorce, in its Judgement Number 64/PUU-X/2012. However, this decision has yet to answer a problematic issue when the claim for divorce is filed separately from the claim for the division of combined assets. Such decision does not consider cases in which the two aforementioned claims are filed separately. This presents a problem for couples who are not muslim and are confined to divorce laws in which the two claims must be filed separately. Thus, does a claim for the division of combined assets that is filed separately from the claim of divorce fall under the Scope of Constitutional Court Decision Number 64/PUU-X/2012? According to the following research, such cases indeed fall under the scope of Constitutional Court Decision Number 64/PUU-X/2012. This conclusion is based on historical interpretation and Extensive Interpretation. According to historical interpretation, the original intent of the judges in drafting Constitutional Court Decision Number 64/PUU-X/2012 is to provide both the husband/wife equal share of their wealth. According to extensive interpretation, the concept of filing both claims separately is to an extension of the concept explicitly addressed in such Constitutional Court decision. </em></p><p><em> </em></p><p><em> </em></p>
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.