| dc.contributor.advisor | SATRIAWAN, IWAN | |
| dc.contributor.advisor | PRASETYONINGSIH, NANIK | |
| dc.contributor.author | ADIPURNA, MOHAMMAD HARI | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2018-11-15T02:55:15Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2018-11-15T02:55:15Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2018-08-22 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://repository.umy.ac.id/handle/123456789/23148 | |
| dc.description | The ultra petita decision that issued by the Constitutional Court indeed has a
uniqueness that may raise the controversy in the society. Actually, the positions of
ultra petita in the Constitutional Court decision are not regulated specifically in Law
or Constitutional Court Regulation, so it shows that the Constitutional Court has no
authority to issue the ultra petita decision. The research aims to understand and
analyze further the position of ultra petita in the Constitutional Court decision. By
using the normative legal research, the author found that the position of ultra petita in
the Constitutional Court decision is recognized only by Justices of the Constitutional
Court, but it cannot be applied absolutely in the Law of Constitutional Court
Procedure especially for the Constitutional Review cases. The existence of the erga
omnes and ex ae quo et bono principles in the Constitutional Court decision are the
factors that make the Constitutional Court valid to issue the ultra petita decision.
Although the Constitutional Court can make the ultra petita decision in the proper
way, the authority of the Constitutional Court in issuing the ultra petita decision has
should be limited to prevent the Constitutional Court replace the authority of the
House of Representative as a positive legislator. The research suggests that the
Constitutional Court should provide a restriction of authority for the Constitutional
Court in issuing the ultra petita decision in form of Constitutional Court Act to keep
the Constitutional Court on its authority as the negative legislator. | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | The ultra petita decision that issued by the Constitutional Court indeed has a
uniqueness that may raise the controversy in the society. Actually, the positions of
ultra petita in the Constitutional Court decision are not regulated specifically in Law
or Constitutional Court Regulation, so it shows that the Constitutional Court has no
authority to issue the ultra petita decision. The research aims to understand and
analyze further the position of ultra petita in the Constitutional Court decision. By
using the normative legal research, the author found that the position of ultra petita in
the Constitutional Court decision is recognized only by Justices of the Constitutional
Court, but it cannot be applied absolutely in the Law of Constitutional Court
Procedure especially for the Constitutional Review cases. The existence of the erga
omnes and ex ae quo et bono principles in the Constitutional Court decision are the
factors that make the Constitutional Court valid to issue the ultra petita decision.
Although the Constitutional Court can make the ultra petita decision in the proper
way, the authority of the Constitutional Court in issuing the ultra petita decision has
should be limited to prevent the Constitutional Court replace the authority of the
House of Representative as a positive legislator. The research suggests that the
Constitutional Court should provide a restriction of authority for the Constitutional
Court in issuing the ultra petita decision in form of Constitutional Court Act to keep
the Constitutional Court on its authority as the negative legislator. | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | FACULTY OF LAW UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH YOGYAKARTA | en_US |
| dc.subject | Ultra Petita Decision, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Court Decision. | en_US |
| dc.title | THE POSITION OF ULTRA PETITA IN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT DECISION | en_US |
| dc.type | Thesis
SKR
FH
205 | en_US |
