Resolving the Judiciary Tensions between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of Indonesia

2Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This paper addresses a critical issue undermining the legal coherence and judicial stability in Indonesia: the discord between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court in the realm of judicial review. This paper uncovers the root cause as a weak chain of validity in law formation, aggravated by divergent legal frameworks governing each court through utilizing doctrinal research methods. Drawing on Bullygin's deontic logic theory, the paper reveals a lack of explicit cross-sectoral policy synchronization. To immediately alleviate these tensions, this paper proposes the establishment of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the two courts, aiming to solidify the chain of legal norms and restore systemic stability. For a long-term resolution, a comprehensive revision of the judiciary law is advocated. This research serves as an urgent call for coordinated reforms to bolster the integrity and efficiency of Indonesia's judicial system.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Purwadi, H., Hermawan, S., Soares, A. A., Németh-Szebeni, Z., & Kusuma, F. I. S. (2024). Resolving the Judiciary Tensions between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of Indonesia. Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies, 9(1), 317–352. https://doi.org/10.15294/jils.vol9i1.4635

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free