MASA JABATAN LEMBAGA LEGISLATIF DI INDONESIA GUNA MENEGAKAN PRINSIP KONSTITUALISME

Abstract

People's representative institutions in the Indonesian constitutional system consist of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR), the People's Representative Council (DPR), the Regional Representatives Council (DPD), the Regional People's Representative Council (DPRD) both provincial and district/city. As a people's representative institution, members of the MPR, DPR, DPD, Provincial DPRD and Regency/Municipal elected by the people through general elections. General elections are held in a direct, general, free, secret, honest and fair manner every five years. The objectives to be achieved in writing this dissertation are to analyze and determine the regulation of the tenure of legislative members in the constitutionalism system in Indonesia and to analyze and find the concept of the term of office of legislative members in Indonesia in order to enforce the Constituent Principles. This study uses a normative juridical approach that emphasizes library research. In this research, the Legislation approach, conceptual approach, comparative approach, case approach, historical approach, and philosophical approach are used. Types of legal materials used are primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The analysis used is qualitative descriptive analysis. The results show that the House of Representatives is neededlimitation of term of office, because the term of office is the same as the term of office of the President as stated in Article 7 of the 1945 Constitution. The limitation of periodization is meant by considerations: guaranteeing human rights, avoiding arbitrariness of members of the people's representative institutions, creating thought innovation institutions in institutions people's representatives. The ideal concept of limiting the term of office of the DPR and DPD, it is advisable to revise the MD3 Law; second, to propose the concept of limiting the term of office of members of the DPR and DPD based on a constitutional democracy perspective, it is advisable to revise the addition of paragraphs in Articles 76 and 252 of the MD3 Law, regarding the affirmation of how many years in office are considered one term for both DPR and DPD. It is also necessary to revise Article 76 Paragraph (4) and Article 252 Paragraph (5) of the MD3 Law, relating to the concept of limiting the term of office to only two terms.