The Interpretation of Misconduct Act as A Reason to Dismiss President: An Ethical Approach

Abstract

The President of Indonesia gets the supervision of the Senate as regulated by the constitution. The Senate has the authority to dismiss the president at the recommendation of the House of Representatives if the president is deemed to have committed treason against the state, corruption or bribery, serious crimes, and misconduct acts or is deemed no longer eligible for president. Misconduct act is a reason for dismissing a president does not have legal certainty because the constitution does not limit the intent of the misconduct act itself. At the same time, the Constitutional Court Act in Indonesia has extended the meaning of this misconduct act. This paper will discuss the meaning of the misconduct act from an ethical perspective and comparative study. Furthermore, it also describes the appropriateness of the limits on misconduct as regulated in the Constitutional Court Act with the intention of constitution drafting for amendment. These legal problems will then be studied using normative methods through historical, comparative, and interpretation approaches then presented on a descriptively-analysis paper. The results of the study indicate that a misconduct act is an act that degrades the dignity of the position as president. Misconduct acts have a broader meaning than criminal acts but can also violate unwritten norms that are determined as law in society.