ANALISIS YURIDIS PRO KONTRA PENDAPAT TERHADAP PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI YANG ULTRA PETITA
Kata Kunci:
Constitutional Court, pros and cons, ultra petita, Mahkamah Konstitusi, pro kontraAbstrak
Abstract :In Indonesia, the existence of the Constitutional Court was only known after the results of the amendment to the 1945 Constitution (1945 Constitution). If in the past the peak of judicial power was only placed on the Supreme Court (MA), now there are two judicial peaks, namely the Supreme Court (MA) and the Constitutional Court (MK). The Constitutional Court has a function to guard (to Guard) the constitution, so that it is implemented and respected by both the administrators of state power and citizens. The Court also became the final interpreter of the constitution. In the case of judicial review by the Constitutional Court (MK), sometimes the Constitutional Court's decision is Ultra petita, and this becomes a pros and cons among experts. The ultra petita Constitutional Court's decision will certainly have an impact on the legal consequences of the decision itself whether the ultra petita Constitutional Court's decision has the power to binding power or not.
Abstrak :Di Indonesia, keberadaan Mahkamah Konstitusi baru dikenal setelah hasil amandemen Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 (UUD 1945). Kalau dulu puncak kekuasaan kehakiman hanya diletakkan pada Mahkamah Agung (MA), sekarang puncak kekuasaan kehakiman ada dua yakni Mahkamah Agung(MA) dan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK). MK mempunyai fungsi untuk mengawal ( to Guard) konstitusi, agar dilaksanakan dan dihormati baik penyelenggara kekuasaan negara maupun warganegara. MK juga menjadi penafsir akhir konstitusi.Di dalam perkara pengujian Undang-Undang (UU) oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK), kadang putusan MK bersifat Ultra petita, dan ini menjadi pro dan kontra di kalangan ahli. Putusan MK yang ultra petita ini tentu akan berdampak pada akibat hukum dari putusan itu sendiri apakah putusan MK yang ultra petita tersebut mempunyai kekuatan mengikat atau tidak.
