Interpretasi Lembaga Negara dan Sengketa Lembaga Negara dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Kewenangan Lembaga Negara

Abstract

Tulisan ini membahas mengenai penyelesaian sengketa kewenangan antarlembaga negara oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi. Dalam penyelesaian sengketa kewenangan konstitusional antar lembaga negara itu terdapat 2 (dua) hal penting yang harus dieksplorasi yaitu soal konsepsi lembaga negara dan kewenangan konstitusional. Guna memahami lembaga negara terlebih dahulu harus melakukan pengelompokan berdasarkan landasan yuridis pembentukannya. Berdasarkan pembentukannya lembaga negara dapat dikelompokkan menjadi 3 (tiga), yaitu lembaga negara yang dibentuk berdasarkan Keppres, UU, dan UUD. Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Putusan Nomor 004/SKLN-IV/2006 tanggal 12 Juli 2006 telah merumuskan kata “lembaga negara yang kewenangannya diberikan oleh Undang-Undang Dasar” dalam Pasal 24C ayat (1) UUD 1945 dengan menggunakan penafsiran gramatika (grammatische interpretatie). Menurut Mahkamah Konstitusi, dalam menentukan subjectum litis atau objectum litis perkara sengketa kewenangan lembaga negara yang kewenangannya diberikan UUD 1945 maka ditentukan terlebih dahulu kewenangan-kewenangan yang diberikan dalam Undang-Undang Dasar dan baru kemudian kepada lembaga apa kewenangan-kewenangan tersebut diberikan.This article is about settlement disputes between authorities of state institutions by the Constitutional Court of Indonesia. In the resolution of disputes between the state institutions there are 2 (two) important things that must be explored, the conception of constitutional state institutions and authority. To understand state institutions once must be done is grouping by the juridical of its formation. Based on its juridical formation state institutions can be grouped into 3 (three), that is institutions formed based on the presidential decree, law, and the constitution. The verdict of The Constitutional Court No 004/SKLN-IV/2006 dated 12 July 2006, Constitutional Court has formulated “state institutions under the authority granted by the constitution” regarding Article 24C Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution by using grammatical interpretation (grammatische interpretatie). According to The Constitutional Court, in order to determine subjectum litis or objectum litis in settlement disputes of authorities of state institutions cases that authority granted by 1945 Constitution, ones must be considered is the existence of certain authorities in the Constitution and then to which institutions those authorities are given.

The Concept of Constitutional Importance to Human Rights in Indonesia

“…Since the amendment of the 1945 NRI Constitution to the 4th there have been various Auxiliary State' 's Organs, namely several state commissions. [13] According to Cornelis Lay, the presence of state commissions is a government mechanism in adjusting the government system which was previously dichotomized into only three branches of power, this is also a form of the state in responding to existing constitutional problems. [14] The idea of the emergence of a state commission began when in this case the state was above the people and then in its development the state wanted the community to also be involved in supervising the state, this was manifested in the mechanism of this commission.…”

“…State institutions whose formation and functions are regulated by law, and (3) State institutions whose formation and functions are regulated by presidential decree. [13] Then, if you look back there are only 33 state institutions whose existence is regulated in the constitution. State institutions regulated in the constitution are considered to have Constitutional Importance value because their functions are regulated directly in the constitution.…”