*Dipublikasikan di Monograf 50 Tahun Prof. I Gede AB Wiranata

A.  Pendahuluan

Konstitusionalisme merupakan konsep transplant dari barat yang menyebar ke seluruh dunia termasuk Asia sebagai bagian dari misi penyebaran doktrin negara hukum rule of law[1].  Dimulai sejak era 1990an, sebagian besar dari Negara eropa timur mulai melalukan reformasi hukum termasuk mengamandemen konstitusi mereka; Sebagian besar negara-negara di Amerika Latin telah mengakui kebutuhan akan rule of law dalam sebuah reformasi hukum dan mulai melakukan langkah-langkah menuju rule of law.  Di Asia, konstitusionalisme merupakan bagian dari paket reformasi hukum untuk mendukung keberhasilan reformasi hukum yang berkaitan dengan investasi dan ekonomi pasar[2].

Pada dekade 1989 sampai dengan 1999, tidak kurang 95 negara anggota PBB melakukan amandemen terhadap konstitusi masing-masing negara dan tidak kurang dari 60 negara mengadopsi konstitusi yang benar-benar baru.  Kurang lebih 92 negara anggota PBB mengadopsi HAM ke dalam konstitusi dan 70 negara mengadopsi constitutional review.  Pada masa ini, rekonstruksi konstitusi sangat kental sebagai hasil dari propaganda rule of law[3].

Namun demikian, definisi konstitusionalisme tidak pernah terdefiniskan dengan jelas terutama dalam studi-studi konstitusionalisme di Asia.  Paling tidak terdapat 2 (dua) aspek pikiran barat tentang hukum yang masuk ke dalam diskusi konstitusionalisme yaitu aspek prosedural berupa perlindungan institusional terhadap diktatorisme di satu pihak dan nilai substantif yang berdasarkan hukum alam di lain pihak[4].

Carl Friederich[5] menegaskan bahwa konstitusionalisme mensyaratkan prinsip pemisahan kekuasaaan, akuntabilitas dari pemerintah dan jaminan hak asasi manusia.  Charles Howard McIllwain dalam kesimpulannya menyatakan bahwa konstitusionalisme mempunyai esensi yang khusus: merupakan pembatasan terhadap pemerintah, antithesis dari kesewenang-wenangan dan kebalikan dari despotisme[6]. Mark Tushnet[7] berpendapat bahwa komponen konstitusionalisme meliputi: komitment terhadap rule of law, peradilan yang independen, dan pemilihan umum yang bebas dan terbuka.

Meskipun aspek prosedural dari konstitusionalisme secara umum dipahami sebagai produk dari tradisi hukum anglo saxon atau common law, tradisi hukum eropa kontinental juga mempunyai bangunan hukum yang serupa dalam bentuk rechtstaat atau pemerintahan berdasarkan hukum.  Konsep konstitusionalisme dalam tradisi hukum eropa kontinental berkaitan erat dengan rechtstaat.  Berdasarkan konsep rechtstaat, tindakan negara dan pemerintah harus berdasar dan dibatasi oleh hukum[8].  Konstitusionalisme berdasarkan rechtstaat merupakan praktek yang dipakai oleh negara-negara berbasis tradisi hukum eropa kontinental termasuk Jerman, Jepang, dan Indonesia.  Pada dasarnya, konstitusionalisme berdasarkan rechtstaat dan rule of law adalah prinsip yang sama dikarenakan keduanya berasal dari satu akar tradisi tua jermania.

Selain prosedural aspek dari konstitusionalisme, terdapat teori konstitusionalisme mengenai nilai substantive yang bisa dicapai melalui konstitusi.  Paul W. Khan contohnya menyatakan bahwa konstitusionalisme bukanlah single set of truths, tetapi merupakan debat yang terus-menerus mengenai arti dari rule of law dalam kerangka demokrasi.  Pada level lokal dan nasional, debat ini berfokus pada ide kebebasan, kesamaan, due process, serta struktur pemerintahan representatif yang diperlukan guna mencapai dan mewujudkan nilai-nilai ini[9].

Mark Tushnet[10] juga menyuarakan dua elemen konstitusionalisme yang sama.  Dalam pemahaman Tushnet, saat ini terdapat dua dimensi[11] konstitusionalisme saat ini yaitu institusi atau struktur pemerintahan[12] di satu bagian dan hak asasi manusia[13] di bagian lain. Menurut Tushnet[14], aspek institusi pada studi konstitusionalisme mencakup isu-isu yang sama dengan apa yang sering disebut sebagai “thin” version of rule of law, sedangkan aspek hak asasi manusia merupakan aspek yang biasa disebut sebagai “thick” version of rule of law[15].  Konstitusionalisme dalam tahap ini serupa dengan aspek substansial dari rule of law dalam tradisi common law atau rechtstaat dalam tradisi eropa continental[16].

Berbicara tentang konstitusionalisme, kita tidak bisa melepaskan keterkaitannya dengan ide-ide tokoh-tokoh yang biasa disebut begawan konstitusionalisme yang telah banyak menyumbangkan konsep-konsep mengenai konstitusionalisme.  Pada tahap ini juga terdapat satu begawan hukum dalam bidang konstitusionalisme yang mempunyai andil besar dalam pengembangan konsep konstitusionalisme.  Ronald Dworkin, penerus HLA Hart sebagai guru besar jurisprudence di Oxford University, merupakan tokoh yang dipuja dan banyak pula menuai kritik. Namun butir-butir pemikirannya tidak bisa dinilai rendah bagi perkembangan konsep konstitusionalisme di dunia terutama dalam hal penafsiran konstitusi.

Tulisan-tulisan Ronald Dworkin baik dalam bentuk jurnal maupun buku selama tiga dekade terakhir, terutama buku Taking Rights Seriously pada tahun 1977 dan Law’s Empire pada tahun 1986 telah menimbulkan pengaruh yang besar pada perkembangan hukum khususnya hukum tata negara. Tulisan ini akan berusaha mengupas butir-butir pemikiran Ronald Dworkin tentang konstitusionalisme yang tersebar dalam tulisan-tulisan sang begawan baik dalam bentuk buku maupun jurnal.

B.  Butir-Butir Pemikiran Dworkin mengenai Hak dan Moral Reading

Ronald Dworkin sangat terkait dengan positivisme hukum.  Hampir tulisan yang dipublikasikan diarahkan pada kritik terhadap positivisme hukum meskipun terkadang tidak secara langsung.  Dworkin berpendapat hukum tidak hanya aturan positif yang bersumber pada suatu otoritas kekuasaan namun juga mencakup standar tes yang lebih berdasar pada prinsip hukum yang tidak bersumber pada otoritas kekuasaan.  Namun demikian menurutnya, meskipun tidak bersumber pada otoritas tertentu, prinsip hukum adalah bagian dari hukum, karena mempunyai peran yang sama dengan aturan positif dalam hal pengakuan hak dan kewajiban subyek hukum.  Dworkin menganggap positivisme mempunyai kelemahan karena tidak mengakui prinsip hukum yang tidak bersumberkan otoritas tertentu.

Tesis hak didasarkan pada perbedaan antara hak dan tujuan; asas dan kebijakan sebagai dasar bagi pertimbangan hakim dalam memutuskan sesuatu. Tiga karakteristik yang membedakan antara hak dan tujuan; asas dan kebijakan.

Pertama, hak mempunyai karakter individual dalam arti bahwa hak melekat pada individu-individu sedangkan tujuan tidak melekat pada individu tertantu.  Dengan demikian, untuk menentukan apakah suatu hak terlanggar atau tidak, maka harus dilakukan pemeriksaan fakta-fakta yang berhubungan dengan individu tertentu.  Sedangkan untuk menentukan apakah suatu tujuan diabaikan atau tidak tercapai, sangat penting untuk melakukan pemeriksaan fakta-fakta yang terkait tidak hanya individu-individu tertentu.

Kedua, tujuan adalah hasil dari proses politik yang biasanya seimbang dan ditimbang antara tujuan-tujuan yang berbeda menggunakan aturan utilitarian sehingga memberikan sedikit atau lebih banyak keuntungan kepada seseorang dapat dibenarkan jika dapat menunjukkan bahwa tujuan tersebut akan membawa keuntungan yang lebih banyak kepada banyak orang. Sedangkan hak, meskipun dapat ditimbang satu dengan yang lain, mempunyai berat tertentu jika ditimbang dengan tujuan umum tertentu serta hanya bisa dikalahkan oleh tujuan yang mempunyai urgensi khusus.  Ketiga, keadilan menurut Dworkin mensyaratkan suatu konsistensi dalam penegakan hak individu namun tidak membutuhkan konsistensi akan promosi tujuan bersama.

Dengan melakukan pembedaan tersebut,  Dworkin berharap untuk menghindari kesulitan-kesulitan dan masalah-masalah yang melekat pada positivisme hukum dimana hakim bebas melakukan diskresi untuk memutuskan masalah-masalah yang tidak diatur dalam peraturan perundang-undangan.  Salah satu masalah tersebut adalah mendamaikan peradilan yang aktif dengan ide dasar demokrasi yang bersendikan kedaulatan rakyat dimana pejabat yang dipilih rakyat tetap bertanggung jawab kepada rakyat yang memilih.  Kesulitan atau masalah pertama ini dalam literatur ketatanegaraan sering disebut sebagai istilah “counter majoritarian difficulty” yang di lontarkan oleh Robert Bork dan pengikutnya.

Menurut pengusung “counter majoritarian difficulty”, hakim-hakim peradilan konstitusi yang tidak dipilih langsung oleh rakyat kemudian membatalkan legislasi yang dibentuk oleh lembaga perwakilan rakyat yang dipilih langsung oleh rakyat.  Dengan demikian, hakim-hakim tersebut tidak bisa diberikan kewenangan untuk menafsirkan kebijakan yang sesuai dengan keinginan rakyat serta kewenangan dalam menguji kebijakan-kebijakan yang bertentangan dalam berbagai situasi oleh institusi-institusi yang berlainan.  Dworkin menekankan bahwa masalah counter majoritarian difficulty tidak akan terjadi apabila putusan pengadilan didasarkan hanya pada asas fundamental.

Kritik umum yang sering ditujukan terhadap hakim-hakim Amerika adalah mereka memberikan pertimbangan putusan yang sangat filosofis dan Ronald Dworkin adalah akademisi yang mendukung tendensi tersebut, karena menurutnya, memang sudah seharusnya hakim melakukan pendekatan filosofis tersebut.

Peningkatan kualitas konstitusionalisme terutama pada putusan-putusan konstitusi dapat ditingkatkan melalui “fussion of constitutional law and moral theory”.  Demikianlah yang dikemukakan Ronald Dworkin pada tahun 1977 yang kemudian teori ini dikenal dengan moral reading of constitution.  Dworkin memberikan abstraksi dari teks-teks konstitusi seperti kebebasan berpendapat, due process, dan kesamaan bagi warga.  Teks-teks konstitusi ini memberikan landasan bagi prinsip kesamaan dan kebebasan dan hakim-hakim yang menafsirkan konstitusi harus menerapkan prinsip-prinsip ini dengan memberikan penafsiran terbaik yang sesuai dengan moral.  Sesuai dengan kedudukannya, konstitusi menurut dworkin tidak cukup ditafsirkan secara umum saja karena menafsirkan secara umum dapat menurunkan derajat konstitusi ke level perundang-undangan.

Dworkin berargumen, pertama, hakim-hakim tidak akan bisa bebas untuk menggunakan diskresi ketika memutus permasalahan hukum tertentu termasuk dalam kasus yang tidak mempunyai landasan hukum yang jelas.  Ketika hakim kehabisan landasan yang berdasar pada hukum positif, hakim tersebut harus mendasarkan putusannya tidak pada norma bukan hukum atau standar non-hukum, namun pada suatu prinsip hukum.  Prinsip hukum ini menurut Dworkin, adalah bagian dari hukum sebagaimana aturan positif dan mengikat hakim.

Namun demikian, Dworkin mengemukakan bahwa politik tidak akan bisa dilepaskan dari interpretasi konstitusi sebagaimana juga interpretasi konstitusi harus tetap mendasarkan diri pada filosofi moral.  Dengan mendasarkan pada pembedaan antara kebijakan dan prinsip hukum, Dworkin menarik kesimpulan bahwa interpretasi konstitusi dapat tetap berada di atas pengaruh politik jika interpretasi tersebut benar benar didasarkan pada prinsip hukum.

Bagaimanakah menemukan prinsip hukum ini.  Dworkin menjelaskan bahwa prinsip-prinsip hukum dalam penafsiran konstitusi harus melalui suatu proses penarikan atau abstraksi prinsip konstitusionalisme berdasarkan “best light interpretation” dan teori “law as integrity”.

Secara khusus, Ronald Dworkin dengan melihat karakteristik konstitusionalisme amerika mendukung penuh hak aborsi, euthanasia, affirmative action, dan kebebasan berpendapat.  Menurutnya, pengadilan terikat akan prinsip-prinsip konstitusionalisme mengenai kebebasan individual meskipun lembaga perwakilan rakyat mungkin membuat peraturan yang sebaliknya.

Hak aborsi menurut Dworkin adalah contoh yang penting bagi implementasi prinsip konstitusionalisme.  Menurutnya, legislatif bisa saja memberikan batasan pada aborsi, namun amandemen ke-empat belas menyatakan bahwa tidak ada seorangpun yang bisa direnggut kehidupannya, kebebasannya, dan harta bendanya tanpa due process of law.  Prinsip konstitusionalisme yang utama disini adalah kebebasan dan dengan ini wanita berhak mempunyai kebebasan untuk memilih yang terbaik baginya.

C. Relasi Pemikiran Dworkin dan Konstitusionalisme Indonesia

Butir-butir pemikiran Dworkin bagi konstitusionalisme Indonesia lebih terlihat jika dikaitkan dengan penafsiran konstitusi.  Sebelum membahas mengenai substansi penafsiran yang berkaitan dengan pemikiran Dworkin, ulasan mengenai Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) sebagai pemegang kekuasaan kehakiman dalam hal penafsir konstitusi diperlukan.

Pada mulanya, sejarah berdirinya lembaga Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) diawali dengan diadopsinya ide MK (Constitutional Court) dalam amandemen konstitusi yang dilakukan oleh Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat (MPR) pada tahun 2001 sebagaimana dirumuskan dalam ketentuan Pasal 24 ayat (2), Pasal 24C, dan Pasal 7B Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 hasil Perubahan Ketiga yang disahkan pada 9 November 2001[17].

Ide pembentukan MK merupakan salah satu perkembangan pemikiran hukum dan kenegaraan modern yang muncul di abad ke-20. Setelah disahkannya Perubahan Ketiga UUD 1945 maka dalam rangka menunggu pembentukan MK, MPR menetapkan Mahkamah Agung (MA) menjalankan fungsi MK untuk sementara sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal III Aturan Peralihan UUD 1945 hasil Perubahan Keempat. DPR dan Pemerintah kemudian membuat Rancangan Undang-Undang mengenai Mahkamah Konstitusi. Setelah melalui pembahasan mendalam, DPR dan Pemerintah menyetujui secara bersama UU Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi pada 13 Agustus 2003 dan disahkan oleh Presiden pada hari itu (Lembaran Negara Nomor 98 dan Tambahan Lembaran Negara Nomor 4316). Dua hari kemudian, pada tanggal 15 Agustus 2003, Presiden melalui Keputusan Presiden Nomor 147/M Tahun 2003 melantik hakim konstitusi untuk pertama kalinya yang dilanjutkan dengan pengucapan sumpah jabatan para hakim konstitusi di Istana Negara pada tanggal 16 Agustus 2003.

Lembaran perjalanan MK selanjutnya adalah pelimpahan perkara dari MA ke MK, pada tanggal 15 Oktober 2003 yang menandai mulai beroperasinya kegiatan MK sebagai salah satu cabang kekuasaan kehakiman menurut ketentuan UUD 1945[18].

Berdasarkan ketentuan umum UU MK, disebutkan bahwa MK adalah salah satu pelaku kekuasaan kehakiman sebagaimana dimaksud dalam UUD Tahun 1945. Kemudian di dalam Pasal 2 UU yang sama dijelaskan pula bawah Mahkamah Konstitusi merupakan salah satu lembaga negara yang melakukan kekuasaan kehakiman yang merdeka untuk menyelenggarakan peradilan guna menegakkan hukum dan keadilan.

MK berwenang mengadili pada tingkat pertama dan terakhir yang putusannya bersifat final untuk:

  1. menguji undang-undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945;
  2. memutus sengketa kewenangan lembaga negara yang kewenangannya diberikan oleh Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945;
  3. memutus pembubaran partai politik; dan
  4. memutus perselisihan tentang hasil pemilihan umum.

Dilihat dari sistem ketatanegaraan, MK mempunyai fungsi untuk mengawal (to guard) konstitusi, agar dilaksanakan dan dihormati baik penyelenggara kekuasaan negara maupun warga negara. MK juga didaulat menjadi penafsir akhir konstitusi.

Istilah penafsiran konstitusi merupakan terjemahan dari constitutonal interpretation merupakan penafsiran terhadap ketentuan-ketentuan yang terdapat dalam konstitusi atau Undang-Undang Dasar[19]. Mengenai ukuran kejelasan dalam peraturan perundang-undangan (termasuk konstitusi atau Undang-Undang Dasar),

Ada 2 (dua) teori penemuan hukum, yaitu : (1) penemuan hukum heteronom; dan (2) penemuan hukum otonom. Penemuan hukum heteronom terjadi pada saat hakim dalam memutus perkara dan menetapkan hukum menganggap dirinya terikat pada kaidah-kaidah hukum yang disodorkan dari luar dirinya. Diandaikan bahwa makna atau isi dari kaidah pada prinsipnya dapat ditemukan dan ditetapkan secara objektif, atau setidaknya dapat ditetapkan dengan cara yang sama oleh setiap orang.

Penemuan hukum otonom artinya menunjuk pada kontribusi pemikiran hakim. Hakim dapat memberikan masukan atau kontribusi melalui metode-metode interpretasi yang sesuai dengan model penemuan hukum legistik atau melalui metode-metode interpretasi yang baru seperti metode interpretasi teleologikal dan evolutif-dinamikal dimana hakim menetapkan apa tujuan, rentang jangkauan atau fungsi dari suatu kaidah hukum, kepentingan-kepentingan apa yang hendak dilindungi oleh kaidah hukum itu, dan apakah kepentingan tersebut benar terlindungi apabila kaidah hukum itu diterapkan ke dalam suatu kasus konkret dalam konteks kemasyarakatan yang aktual. Metode interpretasi teleologikal dan evolutif-dinamikal ini juga memberikan kepada hakim alternatif kemungkinan untuk menelaah apakah makna yang pada suatu saat secara umum selalu diberikan pada suatu kaidah hukum tertentu masih sesuai dengan perkembangan aktual masyarakat[20].

Adapun menurut Jimly Asshididiqie, penafsiran merupakan kegiatan yang sangat penting dalam hukum dan ilmu hukum. Penafsiran merupakan metode untuk memahami makna yang terkandung dalam teks-teks hukum untuk dipakai dalam menyelesaikan kasus-kasus atau mengambil keputusan atas hal-hal yang dihadapi secara kongkrit. Disamping itu, dalam bidang hukum tata negara, penafsiran dalam hal ini judicial interpretation (penafsiran oleh hakim), juga dapat berfungsi sebagai metode perubahan konstitusi dalam arti menambah, mengurangi, atau memperbaiki makna yang terdapat dalam teks undang-undang dasar[21].

Sejak berdiri, MK telah memutus kurang lebih 900 perkara. Putusan ini dapat dikatakan sangat banyak dan menandakan adanya judicial activism yang luar biasa oleh MK.  Tidak hanya dari segi kuantitas, kualitas putusan MK-pun mempunyai derajat kepercayaan yang baik paling tidak dari segi integritas hakim-hakim MK dan tingkat penerimaan yang tinggi oleh masyarakat luas.  Namun demikian, terdapat juga kritik dalam putusan MK misalnya mengenai ultra petita dan lainnya.  Kritik ini tentu saja sangat berkaitan dengan kualitas putusan yang tidak lepas hubungannya dengan kritik mengenai “counter majoritarian difficulty” yang telah dijelaskan sebelumnya.

Dalam konteks inilah kemudian penulis memajukan moral reading dalam pengujian konstitusional di MK.  Hal ini tidak lain untuk memberikan legitimasi yang kuat dalam tiap-tiap putusan MK sehingga kritik bahwa keberadaan MK tidak demokratis menjadi gugur dengan batasan-batasan interpretasi hukum berdasarkan moral reading.  Langkah pertama yang harus dilakukan dalam rangka penerapan moral reading dalam pengujian konstitusional adalah menemukan “fundamental principles” dalam seri putusan MK yang memutus objek yang sama.

D.   Kesimpulan

Pemikiran Dworkin mengenai penafsiran konstitusi dapat menjadi guidelines dalam melakukan penafsiran konstitusi sehingga putusan-putusan MK dapat menjadi putusan yang sesuai dengan nilai fundamental yang diinginkan oleh UUD 1945.  MK yang bekerja di ranah hukum, politik, moral, dan sosial dengan menerapkan prinsip nilai fundamental akan dapat mempunyai legitimasi dalam setiap putusannya.

E.  Referensi


[1] Lihat Thomas Carothers, Rule of Law Revival, Foreign Affairs 77, no. 2 (March/April 1998)

[2] ibid.

[3] Kevin E. Davis And Michael J. Trebilcock, The Relationship Between Law And Development: Optimists Versus Skeptics, Law & Economics Research Paper Series Working Paper No. 08-24, May 2008, New York University School Of Law.

[4] Stephen M. Griffin, Constitutionalism in the United States: From Theory to Politics Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 10, No. 2 (Summer, 1990).

[5] Miriam Budiardjo, 1991, Dasar-dasar Ilmu Politik “Political Principles”, Jakarta: Gramedia.

[6] Charles Howard McIllwain, Constitutionalism: Ancient and Modern, Cornell University Press 1947.

[7] Mark Tushnet, Comparative Constitutional Law: in The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law, 2006.

[8] Lihat Hans Kelsen, 2006, Teori Umum tentang Hukum dan Negara “General Theory of Law and State”, Bandung: Nusamedia & Nuansa.

[9] Paul W. Kahn, Interpretation and Authority in State Constitutionalism, Harvard Law Review, Vol. 106, No. 5 (Mar., 1993)

[10] Mark Tushnet, op.cit

[11] Beberapa akademisi membagi dimensi ini kedalam structural constitutional law and the law of constitutional rights, lihat Adrian Vermeule Hume’s Second-Best Constitutionalism, The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 70, No. 1, Centennial Tribute Essays (Winter, 2003), pp. 421-437

[12] Vicki Jackson and Mark Tushnet, Comparative Constitutional Law eds, 2005.

[13] For US legal scholars, second dimension of constitutionalism is not the new term since most of them tend to think of constitutional government as a system of legal rules and institutional restrain on power to protect private rights. To them, constitutionalism consists chiefly in knowing the number and kinds of rights that deserve constitutional protection or in examining the institutional mechanisms that limit and balance the powers of government.  See Norman Dorsen etal, 2003, Comparative Constitutionalism Case and Materials, Thomson and West; See also Robert P. Kraynak, Tocqueville’s Constitutionalism, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 81, No. 4 (Dec., 1987), pp. 1175-1195.

[14] Mark Tushnet, Supra note 8.

[15] Diskusi mengenai thin dan thick version dari rule of law dapat dilihat di David Trubek, The Rule of Law in Development Assistance: Past, Present and Future in David Trubek & Alvaro Santos eds., 2006, The New Law and Development: A Critical Appraisal, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[16] Konsep supremasi hukum diperkenalkan oleh AV Dicey in Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (8th Edition with new Introduction) (1915).

[18] Ibid.

[19]Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia, Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi, Sekretariat Jenderal dan Kepaniteraan Mahkamah Konstitusi, Jakarta, 2010, hlm. 63.

[20]Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia, Hukum Acara Mahkamah…, Op.Cit.,  hlm.66-67

[21]Jimly Asshididiqie, Pengantar Ilmu Hukum Tata Negara, Sekretariat Jenderal dan Kepaniteraan Mahkamah Konstitusi, Jakarta, 2006, hlm. 273.

*Dimuat di Harian Lampung Post

Penyelenggaraan Pilgub pada 2013  mempunyai landasan hukum yang memang bukan berdasarkan Pasal 233 Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 jo Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2008.

Landasan penyelenggaraan Pilgub Lampung terdapat pada dasar hukum sebagai berikut:

  1. Pasal 56 ayat (1) Pasal 56 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor 32 tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah Jo Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2008 Tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah;
  2. Undang-Undang  Nomor 15 tahun 2011 Tentang Tentang  Penyelenggara Pemilihan Umum

Pasal 56 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor 32 tahun 2004 Jo Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2008 menyatakan bahwa Kepala daerah dan wakil kepala daerah dipilih dalam satu pasangan calon yang dilaksanakan secara demokratis berdasarkan asas langsung, umum, bebas, rahasia, jujur, dan adil.  Pasal ini mengatur bahwa pemilihan kepada daerah harus dilakukan melalui cara-cara yang demokratis yaitu melalui pemilihan secara langsung menurut rezim perundang-undangan saat ini.

Ketentuan hukum di atas diperkuat oleh Undang-Undang  Nomor 15 tahun 2011 Tentang Penyelenggara Pemilihan Umum yang memasukkan rezim Pilgub ke dalam rezim pemilu sehingga ketentuan-ketentuan mengenai penyelenggaraan pilgub selain berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 32 tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah Jo Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2008 Tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah, juga tunduk pada ketentuan Undang-Undang Nomor 15 tahun 2011 Tentang Penyelenggara Pemilihan Umum.

Dalam ketentuan umum Undang-Undang tentang Penyelenggara Pemilihan Umum dinyatakan bahwa Penyelenggara Pemilu adalah lembaga yang menyelenggarakan Pemilu yang terdiri atas Komisi Pemilihan Umum dan Badan Pengawas Pemilu sebagai satu kesatuan fungsi penyelenggaraan Pemilu untuk memilih anggota Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah, Presiden dan Wakil Presiden secara langsung oleh rakyat, serta untuk memilih gubernur, bupati, dan walikota secara demokratis. Ketentuan ini sinkron dengan ketentuan Pasal 56 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor 32 tahun 2004 Jo Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2008 sehingga dapat disimpulkan bahwa KPUD mempunyai wewenang dalam penyelenggaraan Pilgub yang bertujuan memilih gubernur secara demokratis.

Selain itu Pasal 9 ayat (3) huruf a Undang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2011 memberikan tugas dan wewenang kepada KPU Propinsi dalam penyelenggaraan pemilihan gubernur untuk merencanakan program, anggaran, dan jadwal pemilihan gubernur; Ketentuan ini diperkuat ketentuan Pasal 9 ayat (3) huruf c Undang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2011 yang menugaskan dan memberikan wewenang kepada KPU Propinsi untuk menyusun dan menetapkan pedoman teknis untuk setiap tahapan penyelenggaraan pemilihan gubernur berdasarkan ketentuan peraturan perundang undangan; Ketentuan ini memberikan kewenangan kepada KPU Propinsi untuk merencanakan jadwal Pilgub dan menetapkan setiap tahapan penyelenggaraan Pilgub.

Selain memiliki tugas dan wewenang, KPU propinsi juga diberikan kewajiban oleh Pasal 9 ayat (4) huruf a Undang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2011 untuk melaksanakan semua tahapan penyelenggaraan Pemilu dengan tepat waktu; Hal ini berarti KPU propinsi akan melanggar hukum jika tidak melaksanakan tahapan penyelenggaraan pemilu dengan tepat waktu; tepat waktu dalam hal ini berarti bahwa penyelenggaraan pilgub harus menghasilkan calon gubernur terpilih sebelum masa jabatan gubernur sekarang berakhir untuk memberikan kepastian hukum dan menghindari kekosongan jabatan gubernur.  Dengan demikian, menunggu RUU Pilgub yang sampai sekarang belum jelas kapan disahkan hanya akan memberikan ketidakpastian hukum bagi warga Lampung. Sangat disayangkan jika kemudian gubernur lampung harus dijabat oleh caretaker karena penunjukan caretaker hanya akan mencederai makna dipilih secara demokratis sesuai amanat undang-undang.

Analisis peraturan perundang-undangan di atas mengantarkan kita untuk menarik kesimpulan bahwa KPU Propinsi mempunyai wewenang untuk merencanakan dan menetapkan jadwal Pilgub serta menyelenggarakan Pilgub sebelum masa jabatan gubernur saat ini berakhir sesuai dengan tugas, wewenang dan kewajiban hukum yang diberikan oleh undang-undang.  Di lain pihak, pemerintah daerah harus memberikan dukungan kepada KPU Propinsi untuk melaksanakan tugas, wewenang, dan kewajiban yang diamanatkan oleh undang-undang tersebut. Dengan demikian kesimpulan akhir yang bisa kita tarik adalah kewenangan penyelenggaraan pilgub ada di tangan KPU Propinsi sesuai yang diamanatkan oleh undang-undang.

Begawan hukum Prof. Satjipto Rahardjo mengajak kita semua untuk membaca undang-undang dan bukan mengejanya. Maksud dari ajakan tersebut adalah membaca undang-undang tidak hanya kulitnya saja namun juga membaca secara keseluruhan dari isi undang-undang tersebut baik keterkaitan antara pasal-pasal dalam suatu undang-undang maupun keterkaitannya dengan ketentuan-ketentuan dalam undang-undang lain.  Demikian juga polemik pilgub ini harus diletakkan pada pembacaan hukum yang benar dan tidak hanya kulitnya saja.

Presented in International Symposium on Pierre Bordieu Reflective Sociology of Law

Abstract

General Election for the Head of Local Government (Pemilukada) has become one of problematic feature in our democratic ways of managing the nation. This problematic feature is happening in many regions; in Lampung, the problem of Pemilukada has been encompassing the problem legality versus morality. Specifically, Tulang Bawang  Local General Election Commission which has been hailed as winner by Administrative Court, decided guilty ethically and morally by Election Organizer Ethics Council (DKPP). Five members of the Tulang Bawang KPUD acted unprofessionally by annulling the pair from the election.

Academically, a core difficulty in the search for justice is the coexistence of different legal and moral system since there are three legal and moral efforts has been given to Pemilukada participant: Legal effort through Administrative Court (PTUN), Moral effort through Ethic Hearing and the last is through Constitutional Court (MK) which operates within the area of legal and moral. The systems are coexistence, thus creating the confusion of legality versus morality.

This article takes one aspect of the question of the search for justice, that of its relation to the ubiquitous phenomenon of legality and morality. The article thereby attempts to place the problems of Pemilukada within the discussion of legal versus moral using Dworkin moral reading doctrine and moral function that Raz believes lawmaking must aim to fulfill. These doctrines, thus, shall be framed in MK decision as the court of legal and moral. This paper turns attention on how MK is responding to resolve the duality of legality versus morality. While the MK itself was designed to operate encompassing political, moral, legal, and social aspect of nation just like the typical civil law centralized constitutional court, the approach taken by MK in the case of Pemilukada in Tulang Bawang is purely legal.

Keyword: Legality, Morality, General Election, Constitutional Court.

  1. A.  Introduction

Decentralization has become the trend around the world[1]. Nearly all countries worldwide are now experimenting with decentralization. Their motivations are different. Many countries are decentralizing because they believe this can help stimulate economic growth or reduce rural poverty.  Some countries see it as a way to off load expensive responsibilities onto lower level governments. At the same time, donors such as the World Bank sometimes require the promotion of decentralization as conditionality of assistance[2]. Even it is not proven yet, decentralization is seen as an effective medicine to many different kinds of problems.

In the case of Indonesia, decentralization recognition can be found in the Constitution of Indonesia, Article 18 of constitution state that Indonesia is divided into large and small regions and recognizes for their autonomy and their legal origins. Decentralization recognizes that the central government must delegate certain amount of government responsibilities to sub national levels.  It is a broadly held view that a decentralized system matches Indonesia, which is known for its long inter-island distances, rich cultural heterogeneity, and widely divergent social economic conditions.

During the New Order, the Indonesian government pursued a policy of decentralization within framework a unitary state.  To this end, a two tiers system of regional government was established based on Law 5 of 1974 concerning Local Government.  However, centralizing tendencies have strongly, and successfully, obstructed official decentralization policies for the sake of government control and national integration.

The fall of President Soeharto in May 1998 marked the beginning of a new relationship between the central and local governments.  The protest in favor of reform and democratization expanded to the regions before and after Soeharto’s downfall.  Calls for an end to corruption and nepotism at the national level were replicated at provincial, district, and even village levels. Many regions demanded fiscal independence from Jakarta and more political importance[3].

In response to structural and political drivers, East Asian governments have taken different approaches to decentralization, combining standard elements of delegation, deconcentration, and devolution found in many intergovernmental reforms around the world.  The fast starter such as Indonesia has rapidly introduced major structural, institutional, and fiscal reforms in response to a sudden and far-reaching political stimulus. Sweeping decentralization reforms were introduced through “Big Bang” decentralization in the aftermath of Soeharto’s fall and the 1997 financial crisis in Indonesia. These fast starters introduced the basic elements of a decentralization framework, sub national democratic elections, and substantial resource sharing[4].

The House of Representatives (the DPR), formed through democratic general elections in June 1999, passed new Law No. 22 Year 1999 on Local Government that took effect on 1 January 2001. With the devolution of authority to the lower levels of government, certain questions inevitably arose. In extending the authority of the regions, would decentralization weaken and perhaps even disrupt local governance?  Many people saw decentralization as signaling the official recognition of regionalism, which had re-emerged not only in the political sphere but also in the active promotion of local cultures, languages, traditions and customs. Others feared that certain regions could become virtually separate states and that the expression of social cultural and ethnic differences, if encouraged, would adversely impact the concept of a specifically Indonesian character and culture.

The new Law No. 22 Year 1999 on Local Government featured the effective abolition of hierarchical structures between regions and the clarification of fiscal relations between central and local governments[5]. USAID[6] describes the legislation:

The first of these laws, Law 22/1999, assigns to central government only key national functions such as defense, judiciary, foreign relations and the monetary and fiscal system, while devolving most authorities directly to local governments (city and district). The roles of provinces were minimized, restricted largely to inter-district functions and governance and management of deconcentrated central government functions. The law gives local government great autonomy over most of the functions that affect people most directly, including urban services, primary and secondary education, public and basic health services, environmental management, planning and local economic development.

This law adopted the local democracy model as described by Halligan and Aulich[7] that:

The local democracy model values local differences and system diversity because local authority has both the capacity and the legitimacy for the local voice.  This means that local authority can and will make choices that differ from those made by others.

Even with its weaknesses, it is generally accepted by politicians and scholars that the passage of Local Government Law No. 22 of 1999 after the big bang decentralization was one of the most important political events in the legislation in term of local autonomy guarantee.  However, some features of Law No. 22 Year 1999 model did not satisfy Provincial Local Governments, which was in some ways, did not have important role in decentralization process.  According to Law No. 22 Year 1999 each autonomous region is independent and there was no longer any hierarchical relationship between the provinces and regencies/municipalities government.

After more than three and half year implementation, both national and international communities praised the decentralization process as a success. The success could be demonstrated by how the Indonesians quickly adjusted to massive and drastic changes from a very strong centralized government, given only one year of preparation.  The relatively smooth transfer of 2 millions civil servants (Koran Tempo, 14th July 2001) might be the symbol of smooth devolution process that did not create significant social or political unrest.  The central government, especially some line ministries, is still trying to be involved more in the local activities, and it is understandable given their almost absolute power in the past.  The local governments might be still in the learning process on how to rely on their own but they are learning quickly.

Almost at the end of Megawati Soekarnoputri presidency, there was a single event that is very influential in determining the future of Indonesian decentralization: the House of Representatives approval of the revision of Law 22 Year 1999 concerning Local Government and Law No. 25 Year 1999 concerning Intergovernmental Fiscal Relationships. In the end of 2004, Law No. 32 Year 2004 was enacted to replace Law No. 22 Year 1999 and effectively implemented in 2005. The Presidential Election overshadowed the event itself, but its importance was obvious.

Law No. 32 Year 2004 was brought mainly because the failure of coordination function of provincial local governments under Law No. 22 Year 1999 framework.  With the amended law, the provincial local governments have the authority to do monitoring and evaluation process over the regencies and municipalities in their area.  Some argue that with the amendment, the provincial local governments and the governor will become powerful again in the near future and that may explain why the governor election is still intense and interesting.  By giving more power to the provincial local governments, the central government is trying to break the intense relationship between provincial and local governments that sometimes leads to the ignorance of local governments on the existence of provincial government.

The new law brought many revisions prior to Law 22 Year 1999.  The important changes include hierarchical system among the central government, provinces, and municipalities/regencies and direct election for governors and mayors/regents by popular votes.  Broad local autonomy is applied, which means that local governments have the right to regulate and maintain all government affairs with the exception of central government authority stipulated in the law (Elucidation of Law No. 32 Year 2004).

In Law 32 Year 2004, political accountability at the local level now includes the accountability of the local government head (governor/regent/mayor) to both the constituents, via direct elections, and to the local assembly. Vertical accountability in the form of reports from the municipalities/regencies government heads to the governor and to the Ministry of Home Affairs, covering technical and administrative aspects of governance, has also been reworked through this law.

Based on Law No. 32 Year 2004, the process of democratization and decentralization moved another step forward in June and July of the year 2005 when direct elections were conducted for a large number of regency heads, city mayors and provincial governors. Local direct elections are held by popular votes to elect governors or mayors/regents. This provision was not provided in the Law No. 22 Year 1999. Direct election by popular vote is the important provision in the new law; it gives the means to communities to elect their own leaders democratically.  Thus, it gives local government heads legitimacy over the regions, brings him/her closer to community and finally may be more accountable. Yet although this sounds promising, many Indonesian observers feel pessimistic about some of the trends that are emerging and ask whether these direct elections have really promoted democracy at the local level.

This current arrangement, built into Law 32 Year 2004, is a response to the demand for greater democracy at the local level, and represents a significant change from the approach seen in Law 22 Year 1999, where the DPRD was dominant in representing the people and selecting the local head. The change was seen as necessary in view of the wide-spread allegation that DPRD members, and political parties, abused their powers by “selling” the local head offices to the highest bidder[8].

A political party or an amalgam of parties that has reached a certain threshold can put a combined local head and vice-local head ticket forward to the Regional Election Commission (KPUD) (Article 56 and Article 59 Law No. 32 Year 2004). The new rules also encourage parties to open the candidacy to persons either within the party ranks or from the larger community, and for the party to conduct the selection in a democratic way. Post MK decision on independent candidate, currently independent candidate can compete with the contestant representing political party. Local government heads are then selected using the majority run-off system directly by constituent.

The many factors affecting decentralization include local capacities, political and social histories and unresolved conflicts, local forms of social organization, including the role of development agencies, state and government resistance to decentralization, the cost of change, and the extent of commitment to democratic participation. A major problem is that of governments transferring inadequate powers to actors who are not themselves accountable to local populations[9].  Direct election, to some extent has become a law institution providing a safeguard for democratic accountability so that sound policies could be delivered in the decentralization process.

Indonesia’s surge towards democratization was one of the most dramatic events of the late twentieth century. Change and transition are unsettling in themselves. Undoubtedly there has been much pain associated with the birth of this new democracy. Nevertheless, a remarkable opening-up of political space, democratic safeguard on political institution, the regeneration of civil society, a freeing of the media and a positive spirit demanding greater accountability from government have all emerged. Today broader ranges of citizens feel they are partners and active stakeholders in the governance of Indonesia.

In addition, decentralization has changed several fundamental ways in governing Indonesia. It has been colored not only by sweet story of decentralization impact but also by many problems arising within its implementation.  Ultimately, regional autonomy is not just a matter of regulating the relationships between the various levels of governments; rather it is also about regulating the relationship between the state and the people. Regional autonomy is essentially the responsibility of the local population, because it is ultimately the people’s right to administer their own system of government in a manner that will accommodate their own laws, ethics and local traditions[10]. This is to be ultimately achieved through their representatives in the local parliament and head of local government by way of the free elections.

After 7 years of implementation, General Election for the Head of Local Government (Pemilukada) has become one of problematic feature in our democratic ways of managing the pluralist nation. This problematic feature is happening in many regions; in Lampung, the problem of Pemilukada has been encompassing the problem legality versus morality. Specifically, Tulang Bawang  Local General Election Commission which has been hailed as winner by Administrative Court, decided guilty ethically and morally by Election Organizer Ethics Council (DKPP). Five members of the Tulang Bawang KPUD acted unprofessionally by annulling the pair from the election.

Academically, a core difficulty in the search for justice is the coexistence of different legal and moral system since there are three legal and moral efforts has been given to Pemilukada participant: Legal effort through Administrative Court (PTUN), Moral effort through Ethic Hearing and the last is through Constitutional Court (MK) which operates within the area of legal and moral. The systems are coexistence, thus creating the confusion of legality versus morality. This paper turns attention on how MK is responding to resolve the duality of legality versus morality in its decision.  The analysis is involving the moral theory of Raz, moral reading of Ronald Dworkin and the institutional design of civil law type constitutional court.

B.  Case of Pemilukada in Tulang Bawang Regency Lampung Province

Tulang Bawang Regency which called “SAI BUMI NENGAH NYAPPUR” formed pursuant to based on Law No. 2 Year 1997 with Menggala as its capital. Based on administration views, Tulang Bawang regency divided into 28 district of definitive and 239 kampong (sub-district) with amount of its resident 839.889 in person with have earn to agricultural sector and fishery sector, plantation commodity which is dominated palm with rubber, sugar cane and cassava.

Tulang Bawang Regency in 27 September 2012 had held general election for regents.  The problem of Pemilukada in Tulang Bawang Regency started since Tulang Bawang General Elections Commission (KPUD) decided that Frans Agung MP did not pass the threshold to join the election. Previously, the Tulang Bawang KPUD endorsed Frans Mulia, together with three other pairs, as Regents candidates. However, it revised its decision, saying that parties supporting Frans Agung MP did not fulfill the minimum threshold to join the election basing on double support from parties.

Table 1. Tulang Bawang Pemilukada Candidate

Frans Agung MP then took the case to the Administrative Court against the KPUD Decision.  Bandar Lampung Administrative Court reject Frans Agung MP Petition.  While waiting the decision of Medan Administrative Court, Frans Agung MP put petition to The Election Organizer Ethics Council (DKPP) basing his petition that Tulang Bawang General Elections Commission (KPUD) violating the code of ethics by one-sidedly annulling the candidacy of Frans Agung MP.

The Election Organizer Ethics Council (DKPP) through Decision No. 17/DKPP-PKE-I/2012 dismissed the chairman of the Tulang Bawang General Elections Commission (KPUD) and four members for misconduct, following a legal dispute surrounding the Pemilukada in Tulang Bawang. During a hearing at the KPU headquarters in Jakarta, the DKPP said that five KPUD members were found guilty of violating the code of ethics by one-sidedly annulling the candidacy of Frans Agung MP. Five members of the Tulang Bawang KPUD acted unprofessionally [by annulling the pair from the election]. DKPP saying that Tulang Bawang KPUD decision created public uncertainty and reduced the public’s trust in the commission.

In the same time, the dispute of local election of Tulang Bawang Regency had reached MK.  However, MK did not consider the DKPP Decision for the dispute.  By decision No. 72/PHPU.D-X/2012 MK dismiss Frans Agung MP case.

C.  Positivist Tradition of Adjudication in Indonesia

Indonesia legal theory has always been markedly positivist in conceiving law as a set of norms established by legislators and other properly authorized public officers. Such prevailing view, influenced by Dutch formalism, which implanted Civil Law[11] when Indonesia was one of its colonies, was definitely consolidated in the early 1970’s. Since then, an excessive attachment to the law text has been observed in both judges and courts. Legal interpretation constituted a syllogism: the major premise was the applicable statute, the minor premise was the facts, and the conclusion was the decision itself. Indonesia positivism has thus developed beneath the myth of the objectivity of law.

Indonesia did not have a long tradition of constitutional interpretation; its approach of interpretation has been influenced by the classical method of statutory interpretation of civil tradition. In addition to legal teaching in Indonesia, which largely concerns the conventional canon of methods, it also follows Roman legal tradition by installing a pandectist system of civil law. This involves a concept of canon different from that in common law. Employing grammatical, systematic, historical, and teleological interpretation, the MK tries to interpret the constitution like normal statutory law.

Referring to the canon of Indonesia jurisprudence[12], the core of legal interpretation can be summarized as follow:

  1. Grammatical Interpretation
  2. Systematic Interpretation
  3. Historical Interpretation
  4. Teleological Interpretation

Using Grammatical Theory, a provision under a law must be interpreted literally and grammatically.  In systematic interpretation, one attempts to clarify the meaning of legal provision by reading it in conjunction with other, related provisions of the same section, or title, of the legal text, or even other texts within or outside the given legal system; thus, this method relies upon the unity, or at least the consistency, of the legal world.

In historical analysis, the interpreter attempts to identify what the founders of a legal document wanted to regulate when they used certain words and sentences. Using a Teleological interpretation, a law’s provisions must be interpreted by considering the main purpose and scope of the law.

It is quite obvious that the constitution is different from other laws, at least in those countries where it has lex superior status, and amending it requires a qualified procedure. A characteristic of the constitution is that its norms contain more principles and value statements than the norms in laws that are hierarchically below the constitution. This can be seen at least in the case of basic rights. Still, there is a great similarity at the level of interpretation between the norms of the constitution and other statutes. The basic problem in both cases is that the norm content is unclear.

Since its establishment, MK has recorded so many cases encompassing politically related cases to constitutional rights related cases. Until the beginning of 2010, the MK had handled 238 constitutional review cases from 114 different laws[13]. Many of the petitions for constitutional review were granted, which means that part of the law was unconstitutional. These constitutional reviews involving many kinds of constitutional review of law, most of them are very related with the breach of rights provision provided in constitution.

MK judges are using every possible approach in interpreting the constitution. Usually the first interpretation method of grammatical is used by the judges; after that follows the systematic interpretation, since sometimes the grammatical provision of one law is not synchronized with other law[14]. MK Judge Maria Farida put importance on grammatical text with the systematic approach of whole unity of constitution. The historical fact will be the important source to understand the grammatical text of provision.  In each case, the interpretation can be used differently to achieve the conclusion[15].

Sociological approach is also used because provision of the law may be constitutional at present but can be unconstitutional in the future. MK Chief Justice in an interview stated that he prefer the historical approach because he wants to know what is the meaning of one definition in the time it was drafted but still it depends on the nature of the case[16]. However each judge usually has his or her preference of method, thus sometimes creating the dissenting opinion[17].

In interpreting the constitution, the difference of open policy case (example is governor is elected democratically) and closed policy cases (example is candidate for governor shall be nominated from political party) shall be differentiated.  In open policy case, MK can be flexible interpreting the democratic principle. However in closed policy cases, MK is bound by the authority of legislature, only when it breaches the fundamental principle of democracy, MK can interpret the provision of closed policy using sociological approach to protect the citizen[18].  Thus the important thing is how the judgment of MK can achieve the justice and legal utility[19].

In interpreting the constitution, it is important to put the Indonesian context into the definition in question.  The example is the definition of democracy should be adjusted into Indonesia context.  Democracy in Indonesia context then should be seen from the 1945 Constitution system. Therefore, the constitutional provision, constitutional question, and constitutional definition shall be understood as the integral part of the constitution system.  However it does not mean that we can leave the historical fact of law making because in interpreting the constitution, MK can summon DPR and government to explain the law making process.  MK can’t also leave the doctrinal and comparative law approaches since MK can ask expert opinion[20].

Indonesian 1945 Constitution is the cornerstone of the constitutional review but MK judges also considering the international law and international judgment as the reference, but not binding.  Having said that, MK judges shall not be limited by the framer intent and bound by textual provision of constitution if it is considered not fulfilling the justice sense of community.  In judging the case, the method may be different in each case depending on how the judgment can give the certainty, justice, and utility[21].  MK judgments shall have the spirit of the progressive law as advocated by Prof. Satjipto Rahardjo[22] so the substantive justice is more important than the procedural justice[23]. The living constitution with the method of contemporary interpretation following the dynamic of the law is an important tool for interpretation[24].

D. Legality versus Morality

Joseph Raz, as one champion of living constitution, concludes that judges should not confine themselves to “conserving” interpretations, which attempt to clarify its current meaning. They should also engage in “innovative” interpretations, which change it’s meaning in morally desirable ways[25].  While Originalists claim that the original meaning of a constitution is determined partly by evidence of its founders’ intentions, Raz on the other hand, denies that judicial interpreters are bound by those intentions, on the grounds that the founders have no moral authority over them[26].

Another alternative among the above school of interpretation is Ronald Dworkin’s theory, which emphasizes values in the law[27]. Dworkin views judicial rulings as akin to a chain novel, a cooperative enterprise to which a series of authors contribute, over generations. In a chain novel, one person starts a tale; another fills in chapter two, another chapter three, and so on. Each develops the tale further, continuing with what has gone before. Similarly, Dworkin contends, a judge must make his decisions as part of an ongoing story. His role is both to interpret what has been said so far and to move the narrative forward.  This novel shall be based on the principles, abstracted from the moral reading of constitution fundamental values.

Along with this chain theory, Dworkin developed the theory, which he champions most, of law as integrity[28]. This conception aims to show law in its best light by viewing past institutional decisions as embodying a morally coherent scheme of principles, so far as possible, and by following those principles in resolving current and future disputes. Thus, legal practice manifests integrity in applying the same principles in all cases.  This places two important demands on a judge: his contribution must be something that other authors might have written, and his contribution must aim to make the law the best it can be. Judges should strive to create a unified story and a good story, advancing the law by resolving new disputes in desirable ways, remaining faithful to law and rulings of the past[29].

The relation among Raz, Dworkin, and Indonesia Constitutional Court interpretation best explained by showing the trend of Indonesia Constitutional Court Interpretation upon single object of constitutional provision. Truly, the interpretation for socio-economic rights developed by the Indonesian Constitutional Court in the series of relevant cases, has special importance to Indonesian society after decades of authoritarian regime. The provision of Article 33 of 1945 Constitution that defines the State has control upon land and natural resources was used as a weapon by the authoritarian government to silence the protests of indigenous peoples who had been pushed out of their lands and whose traditional rights were violated.

The new interpretation given by the Constitutional Court of Indonesia has clarified that there are certain constitutional constraints on state control based on the objective hierarchy of constitutional values. It was an epoch-making judgment of the Indonesia Constitutional Court which declared that, in light of the people’s sovereignty over all natural resources and public ownership of those natural resources, the people, through the Constitution, had “provided a mandate to the state to make policy, organize, regulate, manage and supervise to achieve maximum welfare for the people” (case reference no. No. 001-021-022/PUU-I/2003 page 106). In the MK decision No. 001-021-022/PUU-I/2003 on electricity law case, Indonesia Constitutional Court has put principle of “controlled by state” and allows the participation of investor to the important sector as long as the state still retained control over the sector.  The Underlying principle is the protection of welfare rights of Indonesia’s people over the peril of absolute ownership by the private sector.  The following series of judgments involving MK Decision Number 002/PUU-I/2003 on Oil and Gas Law, MK Decision No. 008/PUU-III/2005 on Water Law, and MK Decision No. 21-22/PUU-V/2007 on Investment Law have made the principle of state control in MK decision No. 001-021-022/PUU-I/2003 on Electricity Law as the basis of interpretation.

It is found that in this series of interpretation on the social economic rights, Indonesian Constitutional Court has developed a series of hierarchical objective values of constitutional rights in the area of economic activity, such as follows:  first ranked is the right to life, second ranked is the state and nation objectives goal, and the third is the right to public welfare.

By a series of social economic related cases, the Indonesian Constitutional Court has been consistent on the interpretation of article 33 of Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution, and is expected to apply the same ground to succeeding similar cases according to the already established hierarchy of objectives values in the 1945 Constitution. The integrity of hierarchical value developed in these series of judgments seems to imply a typical influence of civil law style of adjudication, but at the same time seems to confirm the philosophical theory of Ronald Dworkin on the “moral reading” and “law as integrity” which is often understood to explain the case law development in the common law tradition. As Ronald Dworkin describes in his concept of “principles” and “the law as integrity”[30], Indonesian Constitutional Court in socio-economic cases shows an obvious tendency by viewing past institutional decisions as embodying a morally coherent scheme of principles, and attempting to follow those principles in resolving current and future disputes.

Is it true that the MK shall consider the conception of legal and moral as described above? Or does this conception only applicable in the case of reviewing the law and not the other authority such as dispute on general election. Before answering those questions, the characteristic of MK shall be discussed and analyzed. Each constitutional review system was developed in accordance with a different constitutional tradition and understanding. These differences reflect the wide variations in constitutional legacies and structures, historical inheritances, and formative experiences, as well as non-trivial differences in the value systems of Asia, America, Europe and other foreign jurisdictions.

These differences are manifested in the model of constitutional court design; there are two basic models, the American and the European.  Traditionally, scholars have said that these two constitutional review paradigms work differently and sometimes in a contradictory way. These classical differences are found in the nature of the constitutional review (concrete or abstract), in their character (incidental or principal), in the type of court (diffuse or concentrated), and in their effects (special or general).  The American system was developed in order to give supremacy to the Judicial Power and it was formulated by the end of the 18th Century, whereas the constitutional court model was developed in the 20th Century to support the rule of law and the supremacy of the Parliament.

Decentralized system of judicial review characterizes the United States; almost all courts-state courts, federal courts, and, of course, the Supreme Court-have the power of judicial review of constitutionality, which, in this system, can be exercised over all acts of Congress, state constitutions and statutes, as well as acts of the executive and the judiciary itself. Even the constitutional validity of treaties and legislation based on treaties may be the subject of judicial inquiry. In short, according to the decentralized system, judicial review is an inherent competence of all courts in any type of case or controversy.

The centralized judicial review system (often referred to as constitutional review), in contrast, is characterized by having only a single state organ (a separate judicial body in the court system or an extrajudicial body) acting as a constitutional tribunal. This model of judicial review has been adopted by many European countries that follow one of the various branches of the civil law tradition, such as Germany, Austria, Italy, and Spain, as well as by almost all of the new democracies in post-Communist Europe and Asia.

Judicial review in a centralized system reflects a different conception of the separation of power and is based upon a doctrine radically different from that upon which decentralization type is founded. Countries preferring this system of judicial review tend to adhere more rigidly to the doctrine of separation of power and the legislative supremacy.  Because most people feel that any judicial interpretation or invalidation statue is essentially a political one, it is sometimes viewed as the breach of exclusive power of legislature to make law.  The centralized system thus refuses to grant this power to the judiciary generally.

The principal reason for creating a separate constitutional court was the recognition that constitutional review differs from the day-to-day work of ordinary criminal and civil courts. It often requires judges to decide value-laden, quasi-political matters, such as whether a particular law or executive action treats all citizens “equally” or is in accord with the “rule of law.” Much greater discretion is exercised when deciding these cases than in the usual criminal or commercial ones, and it was believed that the career judges of the continental system, recruited to resolve these latter kinds of disputes, were unlikely to have the policy and political skills needed for constitutional review[31].

Three principal reasons account for adoption of centralized system of review in a growing number of civil law countries.  First is the conception in civil law countries of a rigid separation of power between branches of government, partially explaining the centralized system of review, second is the absence of principle comparable to stare decisis doctrine in civil jurisprudence which makes it unable to produce a consistent decision, and the third one is that the unsuitability of the civil law judiciary undoubtedly establishes the need for a specialized court to handle important constitutional questions[32].

Therefore, Indonesia Constitutional Court (MK) as typical civil law centralized system of review has also same characteristic of operation in the quasi-legal-political and moral in accordance with the constitution as Kelsen designed.  Not only in the case of reviewing the law against the constitution, all the decision encompassing the conflict between state actor to the dispute upon general election shall consider all the aspect of legality and morality.

However, MK in the case of Tulang Bawang Regency did not consider the decision from DKPP.  This decision shed light upon the positivist conception of MK when deciding the dispute of general election.  It seems that MK use different conception of reviewing the case since there is quite different approach between reviewing the law against constitution and settling dispute of general election.

E.  Conclusion

Legality versus Morality is always problematic, especially in the typical of country such as Indonesia where the positivism take roots for quite a long time.  While the MK itself was designed to operate encompassing political, moral, legal, and social aspect of nation just like the typical civil law centralized constitutional court, the approach taken by MK in the case of Pemilukada in Tulang Bawang is purely legal.  Yet this conclusion is still early and referring to the Law as Integrity Dworkin, it will be fruitful wait and see the continuation of this kind of legality versus morality battle.

F. BIBLIOGRAPHY


[1] Dillinger, 1995, “Decentralization, Politics and Public Sector.” In A. Estache ed., Decentralizing Infrastructure: Advantages and Limitations. Washington DC: World Bank Discussion Papers 290.

[2] JICA. 2001. Government Decentralization Reform in Developing Countries. Japan: Institute for International Cooperation, JICA

[3] Michael Malley, 1999.  “Regions: Centralization and Resistance.” In Donald Emmerson ed., Indonesia Beyond Suharto: Polity, Economy, Society, and Transition. New York: ME Sharpe.

[4] World Bank, 2005, East Asia Decentralize: Making Local Government Work. Washington. DC: World Bank.

[5] IDE-JETRO. 2000. Indonesia Entering New Era: Abdurrahman Wahid Government and Its Challenge. IDE Spot Survey, Institute of Developing Economies.

[6] USAID. 2000. “Transition to Prospering and Democratic Indonesia, Country Strategic Paper, November. Available at: http://www.usaid.gov/id/docs-csp2kes.html.

[7] John Halligan and Chris Aulich. 1998. Reforming Australian Government: Impact and Implication for Local Public Administration in Reforming Government: New Concept and Practices in Local Public Administration. Tokyo: EROPA Local Government Center.

[8] USAID, Supra note 6.

[9] Jesse C Ribot, 2002, Democratic Decentralization of Natural Resources: Institutionalizing Popular Participation. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.

[10] H. Sumitro Maskun, 1999. “Otonomi dan Masa Depan Integrasi Bangsa.” (Regional Autonomy and the Future of Indonesian Unity). Orasi Ilmiah pada Acara Peluncuran Jurnal OTONOMI. Jakarta.

[11] The civil code or civil law system is also called by other names such as Roman law, Continental law or Napoleonic law. All are systems where laws are legislated by parliament or some other form of representative government and codified (i.e. brought together). They are distinguished from common law mainly because they come from parliaments, not from court cases. Indeed, in civil code systems the courts do not usually have as much freedom to interpret laws. In the original Napoleonic courts judges were specifically banned from interpreting statute laws, See Michael Stolleis, Judicial Interpretation In Transition From The Ancien Régime To Constitutionalism In Morigiwa Yasutomo Etal Ed, Interpretation of Law in The Age of Enlightenment From The Rule of The King to The Rule Of Law. Springer. 2011

[12] See Sudikno Mertokusumo, Mengenal Hukum (Introduction to the Jurisprudence). Liberty; Yogyakarta, 1990.

[13] See the detail in MK official Website, accessed on April 28, 2010, http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.RekapitulasiPUU

[14] Interview with MK Chief of Justice Mahfud MD in Lampung August 6th 2010.

[15] Interview with MK Judge Maria Farida in Jakarta August 12, 2010.

[16] Supra note 14.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Interview with Constitutional Judges in Jakarta August 12, 2010.

[21] MK Chief Justice Mahfud MD supports this opinion that certainty, justice, and utility shall come as priority in interpreting the constitution.  Supra note 204.

[22] Satjipto Rahardjo is the initiator and advocate of progressive law during his academic life; see Satjipto Rahardjo, Penegakan Hukum Progresif (Enforcement of Progressive Law), Penerbit Buku Kompas, 2010.

[23] Supra note 20

[24] Ibid.

[25] Joseph Raz, 1999, On the Authority and Interpretation of Constitutions: Some Preliminaries, in L. Alexander eds., Constitutionalism; Philosophical Foundations Cambridge: Cambridge UP; See also Joseph Raz on Constitutional Interpretation, Law and Philosophy, Vol. 22, No. 2 (Mar., 2003), pp. 167-193.

[26] Ibid.

[27] Ronald Dworkin claims that the law should be viewed as a body of principles, not as a collection of rules, See Ronald Dworkin, Law as Interpretation, Critical Inquiry, Vol. 9, No. 1, The Politics of Interpretation (Sep., 1982), pp. 179-200, The University of Chicago Press; see also Ronald Dworkin, Laws Empire, Cambridge, MA. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1986; Ronald Dworkin, Taking Rights Seriously, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977

[28] Ibid.  See also Ken Kress, The Interpretive Turn: Law’s Empire Review, Ethics, Vol. 97, No. 4 (Jul., 1987).

[29] Ibid.

[30] Ibid.

[31] Mauro Cappelletti, Judicial Review in Comparative Perspective. California Law Review, Vol. 58, No. 5 (Oct., 1970), p. 1017-1053.

[32] Ibid.

 

 

INDONESIAN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT INTERPRETATION UPON STATE CONTROL: ASIAN VERSUS WESTERN IDEA

RUDY1*2

1Graduate School of International Cooperation Studies, Kobe University

2Center for Constitution and Laws Studies, Faculty of Law, University of Lampung

*Corresponding author: rechtboy@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

Formulation Article 33 of Indonesia 1945 Constitution was mainly influenced by the rejection of individualism as the symbol of capitalism and colonialism. It used to be associated with the authoritarian control of economic sphere. The problem remain is the limitation of state control set by constitution upon economic spheres. In the same time, model laws prescriptions from International Donor such as IMF and World Bank has largely support privatization in many areas of economic spheres under the name of legal and judicial reform. This paper is trying to answer this old debated issue through the cases review of Indonesian Constitutional Court judgments relating with the economic rights vide article 33 of Indonesia 1945 Constitution while in the same time giving recommendation upon the issue of legal and judicial assistance from International donors.

Keywords: constitutional rights, environment, social science, interpretation, law and development.

INTRODUCTION

Indonesia inherited a complex legal system whose main component parts were western law, adat law, and Islamic law. In the same time, the legal system in Indonesia has been marked by the long struggle to construct a system based on the pattern of the family or community as set forth by the Constitution. This complex legal system basically features the special characteristic of Indonesia community and made the birth of unification supporters and legal pluralism supporters.

Amidst the desire to construct a strong unitary state, Seoepomo who was the great supporter of legal pluralism, however, was able to provide the basic provision in Indonesia 1945 Constitution to protect legal pluralism [1].  It may be said that Indonesia 1945 Constitution greatly accommodated the law from the top and law from below but did not give the way to negotiate between the two. However, attachment to the traditional communal life conflicts with modernization and industrialization. Since that time, the legal pluralism versus unification became great national issue.  This never-ending contest between legal pluralism and unification is not only happen in Indonesia but also happen across the world in Asia [2], Africa [3], and Latin America [4]. Within the issue, old debated upon the interpretation of limitation of state control has not met the conclusion.

Asian Crisis 1997 witnessed the fall of New Order and the beginning of democratization in Indonesia followed by the historic amendment of Indonesia 1945 Constitution. This financial crisis marked the visible process of legal and judicial reform in Asia especially in South East Asia, these reforms mostly promoted by international agencies such as International Monetary Fund, Asian Development Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and The World Bank. Most of these multilateral banks and donor agencies are involved in programs that fall within the broad notion of legal and judicial reform.  It is widely known that the legal and judicial reform led by international agencies gives implication to the policy choice and legal design in the respective countries.

Asia and especially Indonesia worked closely with so many international donors in its development framework upon the legal and judicial reform. Within this so many international donors involvement, the engagement with legal transplantation pressure is evident.  During that time, model laws mostly of American model were promoted and introduced in Asian countries backed by the academic justification under the name of legal transplantation and governance, several of those laws has become performance requirement for funding aid from those donors.

Though influential critics have shared a negative conclusion that the post-crisis legal reforms were unsuccessful, they often have not conducted careful analyses into the substance of legal policies contained in conditionality and model laws. Most observers have questioned the viability of the compulsory mode, rather than the substance, of the model laws being “transplanted” from developed countries to developing and/or transition countries.  On the other hand, their counterparts from the law and economics schools have dealt with the substance of model laws, but they often lack rigorous comparative legal analyses. Various explanatory frameworks have been articulated by the law and economics school, including contingency theory, legal origins, new comparative economic systems, but the weak logic behind these frameworks reveals the political desire to justify model laws reflecting U.S. standards of deregulation or “new liberalism.”

In case of Indonesia legal and judicial reform assistance, the problem remain was the provision of state control in 1945 constitution before several judgment by constitutional court had not been addressed giving way for model laws supporting privatization signed by House of Representatives. Vacuum of legal interpretation upon the state control gave no direction of the legal and judicial reform direction giving a harsh way of such reform without considering the nation public law views.

In the other side, under the rule of law missionaries, constitutionalism has been spread around the globe aided by many international donors. Since 1990s, most Eastern European societies have taken significant steps to reform their legal system including rewritten constitutions even though the results are still questioned. Most Latin American governments have acknowledged the need for rule-of-law reform and are taking steps toward it, or at least proclaiming that they will. In Asia, constitutionalism has been a part of formalistic rule of law reform package primarily to support legal reform related to commercial affairs [5].

At the same time, the rise of constitutionalism is followed by the gradual emergence and expansion of new constitutional court in the world political system as the part of institutionalization of constitutional structure [6]; these new judicial powers have been responsible for translating the constitutional provisions into practical guidelines to be used in daily public life and have been famously recognized as guardian of constitution. Cappeletti [7] in this regard concludes that judicial review or constitutional review is the method for effectuating the positivization of higher values expressed by constitutions. In addition, constitutional court is one pillar of separation of powers theory.

In any case supremacy of constitutionalism and the rule of law would emerge if constitutional or judicial review through Constitutional Courts or Supreme Courts ensures that the constitution is followed.  In addition, a strong Constitutional Court in newly democratic countries helps the state break with its authoritarian past and develops a constitutional culture in respective countries.  Many of these courts have become significant, influential, well recognized, even powerful-actors. Gibson and Cadeira [8] emphasize South African Constitutional Court as defender of democracy in South Africa while Schwartz [9] concludes that the Constitutional Court in new democracies in East Europe such as Hungary and Poland as have been quite influential.

Despite one view that judicial review would be in subject to strong western influence and that it would be difficult to fit with Asia historical image of authoritarian regime, the emergence of constitutional and judicial review has been well recognized and documented by constitutional law scholar in this region [10]. While Japan has maintained the successful image of constitutionalism in Asia, new breed of constitutional court in Thailand and Indonesia after 1997 turbulent political situation give other possible prospect for future legal reform and constitutionalism in the region [11].

Upon issues of liberalism under the name of free market, constitutionalism and the old debate of state control limitation, newly established constitutional court might mediate and find way to resolve the conflict and put fundamental legal basis for future conflict. It can be argued that the Indonesian Constitutional Court hailed as the guardian of constitution may set the limitation upon the old debate of state control vide article 33 of 1945 Indonesian Constitution.  For this purpose of assessing the adjudicative function of the Indonesian constitutional court, this study will focus on the practice of constitutional interpretation, while identifying both the institutional characteristics and the socio-legal cultural conditions enabling such function.  Within the issue of constitutional interpretation, this paper argue that the judicial reform initiated by the international donors such as IMF and World Bank clash with the people idea of economic sphere established in the 1945 Constitution, the judgment by the constitutional court shall confirm the issue.

WESTERN VERSUS ASIAN PERSPECTIVE

The basic outlines of neoliberal development policy since the establishment of Washington Consensus are now well known. Within economics, the lead passed from macroeconomic strategies to microeconomics. An economy was now imagined as a “market” in which individual economic actors transact one with another, responding to price signals and thereby allocating resources to their most productive use.  Government is there less to manage the economy than to support market. This theoretical insight was understood to have quiet direct implication for policymakers.  The basic idea was economic policy should enable rather than impede, market transaction.  Government should do what is necessary to support a market pricing mechanism and avoid doing anything that would distort market prices [12].

At the National Level, the neoliberal policy agenda therefore began by dismantling the modest interventionist regimes that had been developed to pursue import substitution industrialization.  Governments were encouraged to build down price distorting policies left over from their modest interventionist past and remove impediment to the penetration of national markets by the global economic forces.  At the same time, government should encourage the emergence of private actors through privatization, promoting corporate law reform, strengthening the private banking sector, establishing more open and efficient financial market.  The goal was to eliminate discretionary public administration and management of economic assets [12] or in David K Linnan word, the Washington Consensus de-emphasises state involvement in the economy which apparently disregard public law views of the state [13].

The 1997 Asian crisis was the gate for IMF and World Bank to give neoliberal reform prescriptions through conditionalities of restructuring of the corporate and financial sectors. As of 2004, The World Bank alone had sponsored as many as 600 projects of legal and judicial reform in over 100 countries [14]. During the engagement with host country such as Indonesia, model laws were positively promoted by the IMF/World Bank in parallel with the conditionalities on such major economic law areas as insolvency law, secured transaction, competition law and corporate governance together with the model law which support for the privatization. The model laws notably in the area of privatization and financial sectors were the case law discussed in this paper covering the Electricity Law, Water Law, Oil and Gas Law, and Investment Law.

By Asian perspective, government involvement in the economic sphere and people welfare has been considered as the value of typical community people of Asian. Put some example of China, Korea, Singapore or even Indonesia itself. In case of Indonesia, the continental concept of rechtstaat and welfare state, meanwhile, emphasized the role of state in governing the state and community matters, however International Donor largely ignored this typical Asian Perspective. It shall be noted that China achieved highly economic growth without resorting much to International donor prescriptions, specifically upon the big bang privatization [15].

World Bank stated that the reform should come from within the country and responds to its specific needs [16]. However the policy of legal and judicial reform by the Bank and IMF does not give the policy choices for borrowing countries to implement the their own model of legal and judicial reform since the reform should follow the specific models, thus the appropriate legal design which is suitable for each country characteristic will not be achieved. In latter of this paper we will see how Indonesian Constitutional Court response upon the prescriptions thorough its interpretation of Indonesian Constitution.

INDONESIAN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

With the establishment of the Constitutional Court within the Constitutional System as part of the judicative power, two branches of judicial power under Supreme Court and Constitutional Court has been established in Indonesia.  Constitutional adjudication in Indonesia follows the path of civil law pattern by establishing the centralized Kelsenian model of constitutional court outside of the regular judicial establishment. By this system, constitutional court is seen as the independent branch of judicial power beside the Supreme Court with different jurisdiction. As one pillar of judicial power, Indonesia Constitutional Court independency has been guaranteed by article 24  (1) of Indonesian 1945 Constitution.

Constitutional Court as part of the judicial control, base its judgment on the principles and values contained in the Constitution, as the basic norm at the top of the hierarchy. It has an important role in the efforts to uphold the Constitution and the Supremacy of law in accordance with its competence and jurisdiction. Its main function in to adjudicate constitutional cases in the framework of guarding the Constitution. So that it will be implemented responsibly according to the will of the people and ideals of democracy. Its existence is also expected to be able to safeguard a stable administration of government in the country.

Pursuant to Article 24C of the 1945 Constitution, the Constitutional Court has four authorities, namely:

  1. Conduct judicial review to ensure that laws are in compliance with the Constitution;
  2. Make decisions in disputes related to the authority of state agencies the authority of which bestowed by the Constitution;
  3. Make decisions on the dissolution of political parties; and
  4. Resolve disputes related to the results of general elections.

In addition to the above, the Constitutional Court is required to make decisions regarding House of Representative opinion concerning alleged violations committed by the President and/or the Vice President in an abdication under the 1945 Constitution.

The jurisdiction of Indonesian Constitutional Court of reviewing law is considered as abstract review. The abstract review allows for court proceedings that are concerned solely with the constitutionality of statutes, regardless of their application in an individual case. But still the petition shall show the relation upon how the constitutional right has been impaired by the law enactment. The jurisdiction does not involve concrete review arising from individual case as American experience or constitutional complaint as regularly conducted in Germany

CASES REVIEW

After its establishment, Constitutional Court of Indonesia (MK) has recorded so many cases encompasses politically related case to constitutional rights related cases. Until the end beginning of 2010, the Constitutional Court had handled 238 constitutional review cases from 114 different laws. Many of the petitions for constitutional review were granted, which means that part of the law was unconstitutional. These constitutional reviews involving many kinds of constitutional review of law, most of them are very related with the breach of rights provision provided in constitution. This paper however concerning less to the constitutional rights related cases focusing on the economic rights set in article 33 of 1945 Constitution of Indonesia.  The case reviews specifically take electricity law case, oil and mining law case, water law, and investment law.

In a landmark decision on 15 December 2004, the Indonesian Constitutional Court (MK) invalidates electricity law to unbundled and privatizes the country’s electricity system. The MK referred to international experience with privatization in rejecting the law, which they said would harm the country.  This decision is important decision involving the long conflict between freedoms versus social or communal rights within Indonesia legal system. Furthermore, it has made clear interpretation of “controlled by the state” involving economic activity, considering that the constitutional provision in article 33 of Indonesia 1945 constitution used to be debated for its meaning before the establishment of constitutional court. The main issue in this constitutional review was whether the privatization regulated in the electricity law is considered as against the provision of article 33 of 1945 constitution.

In the other decision involving the economic rights, MK has passed a decision in a case of petition for constitutional review of the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 22 Year 2001 regarding Oil and Natural Gas against the 1945 Constitution of the State of the Republic of Indonesia on 15th December 2004 in its judgment No. 002/PUU-I/2003.  MK in this decision had declared part of Law No. 22 of 2001, which gave full authority to enterprises to undertake exploration and exploitation of the Oil and Gas Sector and relinquish oil and gas price determination to the market’s mechanism, as contradictory to article 33 1945 Constitution.  There were another judgment of water law and investment law judgment, which were very relating with the issue of limitation of control by state.

Electricity Law Case

The main issue in this constitutional review was whether the privatization regulated in the electricity law is considered as against the provision of article 33 of 1945 constitution.  In its decision, the Court is of the opinion that the provision of Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution does not refuse privatization, as long as it does not abolish the control by the state to be the main factor in determining the policy of the enterprise in the production branches which are important to the state and/or which affect the livelihood of many people. The Court argued that the people through the Constitution had provided a mandate to the state to make policy, organize, regulate, manage and supervise to achieve maximum welfare for the people.

Court was considering in the beginning of the judgment that the provision of the 1945 Constitution that gives authority to the state to control production branches which are important for the state and which affect the livelihood of the public is not intended merely for the sake of the state’s authority alone, but is intended for the state to be able fulfill its obligations as mentioned in the Preamble to the 1945 Constitution, “…. to protect the entire Indonesian nation and the entire Indonesian motherland, and in order to promote general welfare…” and also “…creating social justice for all the people of Indonesia” .  This is typical of civil law tradition of systematic interpretation that sees the whole unity of constitution as the fundamental basis for provision interpretation.

After taking the stance upon the systematical interpretation, ICC took the historical interpretation and original intent by citing Mohammad Hatta as one of the founding fathers definition of control by the state as follows: “The aspiration embedded in Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution is that massive productions whenever possible are conducted by the Government with the assistance of foreign capital loan. If this scheme does not succeed, it is also necessary to give opportunities to foreign businesses to invest in Indonesia with the requirements determined by the Government…Such is the way that we thought of how to carry out economic development on the basis of Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution…”

After taking so much time in provisional interpretation, Court was taking the fact consideration that competition and unbundling will only take place at JAMALI area (Java, Madura and Bali) as a market that has already been formed. Competition will be won by businesses that are financially and technologically solid, whereas areas outside Java, Madura and Bali whose market has not been formed will become the responsibility of the government to supply electricity in an integrated manner. This cannot be accomplished without cross subsidy from the profitable market at JAMALI. Therefore, the obligation to implement the greatest prosperity and welfare for all of the Indonesian people will not be achieved because private business players will be oriented to earn profit from market which has already been established. Court also took the consideration of fact given by expert presenting the empirical experience in Europe, Latin America, Korea and Mexico where electricity sector restructuring in fact was not beneficial and became a heavy burden for the state.

In its decision court was referring so many times to the concept of greatest prosperity and livelihood of many people basing its logic on the communitarian values within article 33 of 1945 Constitution.  This interpretation may be reflected as MK stance favoring social rights and right to live upon freedom within the economic sphere.  It should be noted that this interpretation is not reflecting ICC stance to reject the idea of liberty and freedom but more to idea that social rights and right to live will prevail against the freedom.  Water law case will show that as long as the state can guarantee the social rights and right to live, the freedom will be constitutionally guaranteed.

Formulation Article 33 of Indonesia 1945 Constitution was mainly influenced by the rejection of individualism as the symbol of capitalism and colonialism. It used to be associated with the authoritarian control of economic sphere.  Nevertheless this provision has been survived through the process of amendment, which means that the economist and the people itself have defended the principle of communitarian in the economic sphere.  So the debate upon whether this provision is outdated or not shall not be the main issue here, but the debate shall be pointed more to the interpretation of Indonesia CC to the provision.  This case has shown that the social rights or prosperity of the people are interpreted as the basic value of the provision of article 33 of 1945 constitution.

The idea to allow participation of business sector is one way to accommodate the balance between social rights and freedom rights and this is important for Indonesia since the case law of constitutional interpretation is still not abundant.  It is worth to mention that Supreme Court of Japan has been supporting the idea of public welfare in its decision. Generally, the Japanese Supreme Court has utilized the public welfare doctrine to maintain a reasonable balance between the individual’s enjoyment of rights and freedoms and the well being of other individuals and of society itself [17].

The practice has been different in other countries, despite the open-ended wording of the constitutional catalogues of rights in Canada, New Zealand, Israel, and South Africa, the courts of all four countries tend to conceptualize the purpose of rights as protecting the private sphere (whether human or economic) from interference by the “collective” (often understood as the long arm of the encroaching state). The result is that the courts in these countries tend to regard state involvement as a major threat to human liberty [18].

 

Oil and Gas Law

MK in this decision had declared part of Law No. 22 of 2001, which gave full authority to enterprises to undertake exploration and exploitation of the Oil and Gas Sector and relinquish oil and gas price determination to the market’s mechanism, as contradictory to article 33 1945 Constitution.

However MK finds it evident that the arguments presented by the Petitioners are not sufficiently grounded, so that the law in its entirety is not proved to have been contradictory to the 1945 Constitution. The reason is that the substance of the state’s control appears to be sufficiently clear in the reasoning of the quo law both in upstream and in downstream sectors. The most important feature in the oil and gas constitutional review is that the MK considers the Oil and Gas Sector as a production branch important to the State and pivotal to the lives of the people, so the control over production branch shall be in the hand of government. Private entities may participate as government partner thorough contract concession.

MK mentioned that the matter is different from the Electrical Law that has been reviewed by the Court with the Decision for Case Number 001-021-022/PUUI/ where its reasoning on the intended control by the state principle does not appear to by clearly described in the Articles of the aforementioned Electrical Power Law which should have been the first and foremost reference in accordance to the mandate of Article 33 of the 1945 constitution.

It is important to note that the Government in its answer put emphasis on the minority people saying that Article 33 Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution provides that Production branches which are important for the state and which affect the livelihood of the public shall be controlled by the state. Its further reminds that the control over productions shall in no way fall into the hands of individuals or groups in power and the people at large will be oppressed by them. Having power refers not only to political power but also economic power through their power in controlling the market and production factors.

The interpretation of court in this case fundamentally is in the same nature with the interpretation in the electricity case. It seems that government has anticipated the problem of privatization in the law making process by introducing the system that gives the participation of government within the concept of “controlled by the state”.

 

Water Law

In the Water Law case (MK Decision 058-059-060-063/2004 and 008/2005), almost 3,000 individuals and several NGOs requested the MK to review Water Law No. 7 Year 2004. A majority of the MK upheld the constitutionality of the Law, largely because the MK believed that under it the state retained control over the natural resources.  The interpretation of the case is in the same nature of two cases beforehand. By this judgment, MK has been set a limitation for future case relating with the control of state.

These judgments confirm Dworkin theory on law as integrity [19]. With these judgments, MK has been consistent on the interpretation of article 33 of Indonesia 1945 Constitution.  Law as integrity as Dworkin said aims to show law in its best light by viewing past institutional decisions as embodying a morally coherent scheme of principles, so far as possible, and by following those principles in resolving current and future disputes. In the electricity law case, MK has put principle of “controlled by state” and allows the participation of investor to the important sector as long as the state still retained control over the sector.  Underlying principle is the protection of welfare right of Indonesia people over the peril of absolute ownership by private sector.

Investment Law Case

Indonesian Constitutional Court has declared their final decision for the Investment Law (UUPM) or Law No. 25/2007. The decision is to granting part of sue made by the people joined in Gerak Lawan (People’s Movement Against Neo-colonialism and Imperialism). The lawsuit material that is being granted is only regarding article 22, which stated about granting land facility for investors. According to UUPM, article 22 guarantee investors to receive and extend ahead Right of Tenure for 95 years, right to build for 80 years and right to Use for 70 years.

The Constitutional Court considered the article to be unconstitutional. The reason is that article considered to be contradictive with 1945 Indonesian Constitution (UUD 1945) article 33 point 3, which explain state ownership’s right and the people’s economic principle. In the end, the words that refer to land facility extension for the investors “ahead” is eliminate. Although, Right of Tenure, Right to build, and Right to Use can still be extended by investors referring to the next article.

Investment Law case is another novel chain as Dworkin champion, MK put once chapter of principle in the electricity law case, next chapter following the established principle in the electricity case, ICC put another story in the water law case, and still following the chain story upheld the principle in the Investment Law case. By this case, interpretation of article 33 of Indonesia 1945 constitution has found its moral value. So the MK in the next shall ground its judgment following the established moral value. Indonesia’s highly respected constitutional scholar Asshiddiqie in his newly book Konstitusi Ekonomi has firmly suggested the constitutional scholarship to always use moral reading for Indonesia constitutional provision interpretation [20]. Thus, it will be worth to see future trends upon the interpretation of article 33 of Indonesia 1945 Constitution.

Moral Value of Control by State under 1945 Constitution

The cases reviews above have shown the natures of control by state vide article 33 of 1945 constitution.  There are two important limitations have been established by MK so far for the future references of legal and judicial reform by government and international donor. The first one is that control by state means that government shall have involvement over the important branch of economic resources so that the welfare of the people can be guaranteed. By this limitation, privatization upon the important branch of economic resources shall be regarded as against constitution; the second one is that the management of economic resources by the government shall be directed to the prosperity of the people. By this limitation, the government shall protect the weak people from the evil side of neo liberalism rather than giving full freedom of economic activity. These two limitations are moral values that shall be taken into account in every government policy and international donor assistances upon economic resources.

 

CONCLUSION

Over 2000 years ago, Zhuang Zhi described two kinds of birds: those who flew high and saw a large part of the world but knew little in detail, and those that hopped along the ground and knew much about one small corner of the world. The legal and judicial reform thus shall be seen from the respective countries and shall be directed together in achieving the same vision of legal reform.  Article 33 of 1945 Constitution, despite having critic’s of impeding the economic activity because it provision of state control upon important branch of economic activity, the article is the vox populi of Indonesian people. Therefore the limitation established by Constitutional Court interpretation shall be respected and become the basic guidance in legal and judicial reform.

References

[1]     Rudy. 2006. Decentralization in Indonesia: Reinventing Local Rights. Paper presented in 15th International Conference on Legal Pluralism, Depok Indonesia June 29th-July 2nd 2006.

[2]     Michael O. Mastura. 1994. Legal Pluralism in the Philippines, Law & Society Review, (28), No. 3, Law and Society in Southeast Asia, pp. 461-476.

[3]     Gordon R. Woodman. 1996. Legal Pluralism and the Search for Justice, Journal of African Law, (40), No. 2, Liber Amicorum for Professor James S. Read, pp. 152-167.

[4]     Rachel Sieder, The judiciary and indigenous rights in Guatemala. International Journal of Constitutional Law, (5) No. 2, pp. 224, Oxford University Press.

[5]     Thomas Carothers. 1998. Rule of Law Revival, Foreign Affairs (7), no. 2.

[6]     Tate, C. Neal, 1995, Why the Expansion of Judicial Power? In Tate, C. Neal, & Torbjorn Vallinder, eds. 1995. The Global Expansion of Judicial Power. New York: New York Univ. Press.

[7]     Mauro Cappelletti. 1970. Judicial Review in Comparative Perspective. California Law Review, (58), Pp. 1017-1053.

[8]     James L Gibson & Gregory A Cadeira. 2003. South African Constitutional Court: Defender of Democracy, The Journal of Politics, (65) No. 1 Pp. 2.

[9]     Schwartz, Herman. 1998. Eastern Europe’s Constitutional Courts, Journal of Democracy (9) No. 4 pp. 100–11.

[10]  Tom Ginsburg. 2002. Confucian Constitutionalism? The Emergence of Constitutional Review in Korea and Taiwan, Law & Social Inquiry, (27) No. 4 pp. 763-799.

[11]  Erik Martinez Kuhonta, The Paradox of Thailand 1997 ‘People Constitution’, Asian Survey, (48) Issue 3, pp. 373–392.

[12]  David Kennedy, The Rule of Law: Political Choices and Development Common Sense in D.M. Trubek and Santos, The New Law and Development: A Critical Appraisal, Cambridge University Press.

[13]  David K Linnan. 2007. Like a Fish Needs a Bicycle: Public Law Theory, Civil Society, and Governance Reform in Indonesia in Tim Lindsey ed. Law Reform in Developing and Transitional States. Routledge: New York. Pp. 269-290.

[14]  Alvaro Santos. 2006. The “World Bank’s Uses of the “Rule of Law” Promise in EconomicDevelopment,” in D.M. Trubek and Santos, The New Law and Development: A Critical Appraisal, Cambridge University Press.

[15]  Frank Upham. 2009. From Demsetz to Deng: Speculation on The Implications of Chinese Growth for Law and Development Theory. International Law and Politics Volume 41:551.

[16]  World Bank. 2004. Initiatives on Legal and Judicial Reform 2004.

[17]  John M. Maki. 1999. The Constitution of Japan: Pacifism, Popular Sovereignty, and Fundamental Human Rights, Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 53, No. 1.

[18]  Ran Hirschl, 2004, Towards Juristocracy: The Origins And Consequences Of The New Constitutionalism. Pp. 146

[19]  Ronald Dworkin. 1986. Laws Empire. Cambridge, MA. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

[20]  Jimly Asshiddiqie. 2010. Konstitusi Ekonomi “Economic Constitution”. Jakarta:  Penerbit Kompas.

Constitutionalism as the integral part of rule of law in new democracies has been believed as magic spell for development especially in promoting economic development, Hernando De Soto[1] makes claim that “Development is possible only if efficient legal institutions are available to all citizens.”  Furthermore, Amartya Sen masterpiece work Development as Freedom gives another possibility for the relationship between development and constitutionalism; in any case, this possibility makes the constitutionalism may matter for development and makes it become the one core of law and development study.

It is often said that constitutionalism is in considerable tension with democracy. Thomas Jefferson was emphatic on the point, arguing that constitutions should be amended by each generation in order to ensure that the dead past would not constrain the living present. Many contemporary observers echo the Jeffersonian position, claiming that constitutional constraints often amount to unjustified, antidemocratic limits on the power of the present and future[2].

The authority of courts to review and declare unconstitutional popularly enacted legislation is an aspect modern constitution that strikes many as inconsistent with the idea of democracy. As Hart say’s this as extraordinary judicial phenomenon to be particularly hard to justify in a democracy[3]. As Alexander Bickel states it: The root difficulty is that judicial review is a counter majoritarian force, this is the reason the charge can be made that judicial review is undemocratic[4].  A related reason offered to support the claim of the undemocratic nature of judicial review is that judges are not electorally accountable to the majority. As John Ely says: The central problem of judicial review is a body that is not elected or otherwise politically responsible in any significant way telling the people’s elected representatives that they cannot govern as they’d like[5].

The basic objection to judicial review might now be reformulated in the following way: judicial review, since it involves the authority to overrule legislation enacted through procedures that accord with this principle, is a limitation upon citizens’ equal rights of participation. It does not matter whether the judges making these decisions are electorally accountable or not. By exercising their equal political rights through legislative procedures designed to accommodate them, citizens have already made as democratic a determination as can be made[6].

All these objections are based on the conception of democracy in purely procedural term.  Now, of course if democracy is simply defined in procedural terms as a matter of stipulation, then it is trivial that judicial review is undemocratic. The appropriate way to address questions of the legitimacy and scope of judicial review in a democracy is not by focusing simply upon the political rights and procedures that have traditionally been held to be central to a democracy. Instead, we need look to the values and ideals in virtue of which we hold such procedural aspects of democracies as equal political rights, majority rule, and political accountability important. Then it can be asked what role, if any, judicial review has in promoting or undermining these values[7].

Judicial review of legislation has inherently undemocratic tendencies since it is the revocation of the will of the majority on the basis of a decision by unelected judges. But when this revocation finds its basis in the will of the people, or fundamental values, or some other extra-textual source, but to the text of the Constitution, it can be reconciled with democracy[8]. As Ely[9] puts it, “Thus the judges do not check the people, the Constitution does, which means the people are ultimately checking themselves”.  If it turns out that there is no conception of judicial review that would maintain and promote the ideals that stand behind our commitment to democracy, then the categorical claim that judicial review is undemocratic can be sustained. If, however, on some conception of its role judicial review can better implement the ideals upon which political democracy is based, then this is a reason for concluding, not simply that judicial review can be compatible with democracy, but that it is an important democratic institution.

To prevent the undemocratic way of judicial review, judges cannot use their own values, however considering the broad phrase of constitutional provision; clause bond interpretive is also impossible.  Therefore the introduction of moral reading of constitution by Ronald Dworkin is one way to reconcile the protection of rights and the undemocratic latent of judicial review.  This reconciliation is very much important for the developing countries in avoiding the failure of constitutionalism.

The democratic argument for judicial review rests on the assumption that the courts can play a significant role in maintaining the conditions of democratic sovereignty. An obvious objection to this argument is that we have no assurance that judicial review will be properly exercised to correct for the failures of legislative processes. Just as likely it will be used to secure the power of elites against legitimate democratic measures[10]. This is an empirical question that needs an answer through empirical case study.


[1] Hernando De Soto, 1989, The Other Path: The Invisible Revolution In The Third World, pp 186.

[2] Cass R. Sunstein, Constitutionalism and Secession, The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 58, No. 2, Approaching Democracy: A New Legal Order for Eastern Europe (Spring, 1991), pp. 633-670

[3] H.LA. Hart, American Jurisprudence Through English Eyes, in Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983), p. 125.

[4] Alexander Bickel, The Least Dangerous Branch (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1962), pp. 16-17.

[5] Ely, Supra note 43, p. 4—5 .

[6] Samuel Freeman, Constitutional Democracy and the Legitimacy of Judicial Review, Law and Philosophy, Vol. 9, No. 4 (1990 – 1991), p. 334.

[7] Ibid. p. 340.

[8] Ely, Supra note 43. p. 8—9.

[9] Ibid. p. 8.

[10] Peter Railton argues that the court is an elite institution that maintains the power of elites in liberal democracies via judicial review, in Judicial Review, Elites, and Liberal Democracy, Nomos, XXV: Liberal Democracy (New York: NYU Press, 1983), 153-80.

dimuat di Inovasi Online Edisi Vol 12/XX/November 2008, dapat diunduh di  http://io.ppi-jepang.org/article.php?id=289

1.  Pendahuluan

Pemanasan Global yang disebabkan oleh emisi gas penyebab efek rumah kaca adalah suatu keniscayaan.  Industrialisasi dan pembangunan di seluruh dunia sedikit banyak ikut andil dalam penciptaan pemanasan global.  Meskipun tidak sedikit juga upaya untuk menekan atau mencegah peningkatan pemanasan global, baik di level internasional, nasional, maupun konteks lokal.

Dalam upaya pencegahan pemanasan global ini pun, terdapat banyak sekali pandangan mengenai cara terbaik untuk mencegah bahkan mengurangi pemanasan global.  Salah satunya adalah pihak yang memegang teguh prinsip modernisasi yang menyatakan bahwa pencegahan pemanasan global harus dilaksanakan melalui cara modernisasi dan teknologi, kelompok ini mempercayai bahwa teknologi dapat mencegah terjadinya pemanasan global.  Di lain pihak terdapat juga kelompok radikal yang menyuarakan keinginan kembali ke alam untuk menyelamatkan bumi [1].

Dari aspek hukum internasional, kerangka hukum mengenai pemanasan global ditandai dengan adanya UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Tahun 1992 atau lebih dikenal dengan Deklarasi Rio [2] yang kemudian dilanjutkan dengan diadakannya Conference of Parties to UNFCCC yang kemudian menghasilkan Kyoto Protocol yang cukup fenomenal [3]. Meskipun dalam beberapa hal Kyoto Protocol mempunyai beberapa kekurangan, paling tidak telah memberikan suatu instrumen hukum yang bersifat internasional dalam upaya pencegahan pemanasan global.  Pada tahun 2007 bertempat di Nusa Dua Bali, Indonesia menjadi tuan rumah UNFCCC Tahun 2007 sebagai tindak lanjut dari implementasi Kyoto Protocol.

Pertanyaan yang mengemuka kemudian adalah apakah kerangka hukum internasional tersebut telah cukup memberikan suatu kerangka hukum menyeluruh bagi pencegahan pemanasan global?  Jawabannya sangat sederhana yaitu tidak karena kerangka hukum nasional bahkan lokal sangat pula dibutuhkan dalam usaha pencegahan pemanasan global.  Hal ini tidak lain dikarenakan adanya keragaman sosial dan sistem hukum di antara negara-negara di dunia.  Bahkan di tengah-tengah globalisasi ekonomi yang terkadang melewati batas negara, tiap negara mempunyai keragaman di banyak hal misalnya sejarah, budaya, pertumbuhan ekonomi, sistem pemerintahan dan lainnya. Keragaman ini mempunyai implikasi yang besar terhadap pengaturan tentang lingkungan khususnya pencegahan terhadap pemanasan global.

Dengan demikian, tiap-tiap negara dapat saja mempunyai pilihan-pilihan yang berbeda dalam hal seberapa jauh pencegahan pemanasan global dilakukan dan sebarapa jauh kerangka hukum  di suatu negara dibangun dalam rangka pencegahan pemanasan global.   Hal ini tentunya didasarkan pada norma hukum yang ada di negara tersebut, konsep mengenai efisiensi dan keadilan, serta pengalaman suatu negara dalam pengaturan suatu kerangka hukum [4].  Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa pembangunan institusi hukum dalam level nasional bahkan lokal sangat penting dalam upaya pencegahan pemanasan global.

2.  Kerangka Hukum Nasional

Komitmen Indonesia dalam hal pencegahan pemanasan global tidak diragukan lagi. Selain telah sukses menjadi tuan rumah UNFCCC Tahun 2007 di Nusa Dua Bali, komitmen Indonesia di dukung oleh Pernyataan Presiden SBY saat membuka pertemuan informal tingkat menteri untuk persiapan Konferensi Internasional Pencegahan Perubahan Iklim di Istana Kepresidenan Bogor mengenai pentingnya aksi global dalam pencegahan pemanasan global dan menyelamatkan bumi dan agar semua negara tidak perlu menunggu sampai pemanasan global terjadi untuk melakukan aksi bersama [5].  Pernyataan ini merupakan suatu pernyataan yang menggambarkan politik hukum Indonesia dalam upaya pencegahan pemanasan global.

Sementara itu perlu digarisbawahi bahwa terlepas dari tekanan yang kuat dari dunia internasional kepada setiap negara untuk melakukan upaya pencegahan pemanasan global, terlebih bagi negara berkembang seperti Indonesia, perlu diingat bahwa tiap-tiap negara mempunyai karakteristik yang berbeda-beda. Oleh karena itu pula, pencegahan pemanasan global harus memperhatikan aspek-aspek yang unik ini.  Aspek-aspek yang khusus inilah yang harus dijadikan batu pijakan dalam pengambilan kebijakan dan pembagunan institusi hukum yang menunjang kebijakan tersebut.   Dalam hal ini, Indonesia dengan anugerah Yang Maha Esa telah diberikan kekhasan yang jarang ada di negara lain, misalnya hutan yang sangat luas yang dipercaya merupakan paru-paru dunia. Kekhasan inilah yang kemudian harus dipertimbangkan dalam pembangunan institusi hukum mengenai pencegahan pemanasan global di Indonesia.

Sampai saat ini Indonesia telah meletakkan beberapa institusi hukum yang terkait dengan pemanasan global seperti misalnya UU No. 23 Tahun 1997 tentang Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup, UU No.26 tahun 2007 Tentang Penataan Ruang, UU No.30 tahun 2007 tentang Energi, UU 27 tahun 2007 tentang Pengelolaan Wilayah Pesisir dan Pulau-Pulau Kecil, Peraturan Pemerintah No. 59 tahun 2007 tentang Panas Bumi, Peraturan Pemerintah No. 58 tahun 2007 tentang Perubahan Atas PP No. 35 tahun 2002 tentang Dana Reboisasi, PP No. 6 tahun 2007 tentang Tata Hutan dan Penyusunan Rencana Pengelolaan Hutan, Serta Pemanfaatan Hutan,  terakhir yang terbaru adalah UU No. 18 tahun 2008 tentang pengelolaan sampah.

Apabila kita melihat banyaknya peraturan perundang-undangan telah ditetapkan yang terkait dengan pencegahan pemanasan global, maka hal ini sangat konsisten dengan komitmen Indonesia dalam upaya pencegahan pemanasan global.  Namun demikian, permasalahan yang kemudian terjadi dalam pembangunan hukum di Indonesia adalah ketidakseimbangan antara perhatian pada pembangunan institusi hukum nasional dan pembangunan institusi hukum daerah. Saat ini pembangunan institusi hukum di Indonesia bernuansa sangat nasional dengan beranggapan bahwa institusi hukum di daerah akan serta merta mengikuti institusi hukum nasional.   Pertanyaan besar yang kemudian muncul dari kondisi demikian adalah, apakah secara kenyataan institusi hukum di daerah serta merta mengikuti pola pembangunan institusi hukum nasional terutama dalam hal pencegahan pemanasan global?

3.  Pembangunan Institusi Hukum di Daerah

Negara merupakan sebuah tatanan hukum.  Unsur-unsur negara yang mencakup wilayah dan rakyat merupakan bidang validitas teritorial dan personal dari tatanan hukum tersebut.  Dalam hal ini sentralisasi dan desentralisasi harus dipahami sebagai dua tipe tatanan hukum.  Perbedaan antara negara yang sentralistis dengan desentralistis mesti merupakan perbedaan di dalam tatanan hukumnya. Konsepsi tentang tatanan hukum sentralistis mengandung arti bahwa semua normanya berlaku bagi seluruh teritorial yang dijangkaunya; ini berarti bahwa semua normanya memiliki bidang validitas teritorial yang sama. Dipihak lain, tatanan hukum desentralistis terdiri atas norma-norma yang memiliki validitas teritorial yang berbeda.  Sejumlah normanya berlaku untuk seluruh teritorial sedangkan sejumlah norma yang lain berlaku hanya untuk bagian-bagian teritorial yang berbeda [6].

Norma-norma yang berlaku bagi seluruh teritorial disebut sebagai norma-norma pusat, sedangkan norma-norma yang berlaku bagi sebagian teritorial disebut norma daerah. Norma-norma daerah ini kemudian dilembagakan dalam suatu produk hukum daerah yang salah satunya adalah perda. Perda merupakan instrumen pemerintah daerah untuk menjabarkan peraturan perundang-undangan yang lebih tinggi sesuai dengan kondisi faktual demografi, geografi dan  geo-sosial ekonomi masing-masing daerah ke dalam suatu sistem hukum. Dalam perda akan tergambar politik hukum pemerintah daerah dalam mengelola pemerintahan daerahnya.

tabel 1 kira2 disini….

Bila dilihat dari konfigurasi jumlah perda berdasarkan kategori, dapat dilihat bahwa isu-isu yang diangkat dan jenis perda yang dikeluarkan lebih banyak berkutat pada perda-perda kelembagaan atau institusi pemerintahan dan daerah serta keuangan khususnya pajak dan retribusi daerah. Desentralisasi kemudian diartikan sebagai kesempatan untuk memperkaya daerah masing-masing dengan meningkatkan pundi-pundi PAD masing-masing dengan berbagai macam cara yang dilegalkan: pajak, retribusi, pengerukan kekayaan sumber daya alam (SDA). Dalam hubungannya dengan pencegahan pemanasan global, kategori perda yang sangat terkait adalah perda yang mengatur mengenai SDA. Perda dalam kategori ini menjadi salah satu primadona dalam implementasi otonomi daerah. Faktor pemikat untuk mengatur SDA karena menganggap sumber daya tersebut bersifat given dan mudah mendatangkan keuntungan tanpa perlu melakukan investasi dahulu, cukup dengan format izin. Dalam hal ini, pembangunan institusi hukum yang dilakukan di daerah lebih menitikberatkan pada aspek pemanfaatan dan bukan pada aspek pemeliharaan dan perlindungan.  Bagaimanapun juga sektor SDA, misalnya hutan, berkait erat dengan daya dukung lingkungan dan kemampuan untuk mencegah pemanasan global.

Keadaan tersebut menunjukkan bahwa lembaga-lembaga pembuat perundang-undangan  (law making institutions) di daerah telah gagal menyusun berbagai perundang-undangan transisional yang dapat berlaku secara efektif untuk mendorong terciptanya sebuah tata pemerintahan yang baik dan penegakan hukum. Sebaik-baiknya instrumen hukum internasional dan hukum nasional dibangun guna pencegahan pemanasan global, ketiadaan gerak sinergis pembangunan  institusi hukum di daerah dapat mengakibatkan upaya pemerintah untuk mengatasi berbagai persoalan khususnya dalam hal ini pemanasan global dapat saja tidak membuahkan hasil.  Oleh karena itu, perhatian yang khusus perlu diberikan terhadap pembangunan institusi hukum mengenai pencegahan pemanasan global di daerah.

Di beberapa daerah pada tahun-tahun belakangan ini, sedikit banyak terdapat inisiatif lokal untuk membangun institusi hukum yang lebih bergigi dimana contoh salah satunya adalah Perda Kabupaten Lampung Barat No. 18 Tahun 2004 tentang Pengelolaan Sumber Daya Alam dan Lingkungan Hidup Berbasis Masyarakat. Melalui Perda ini diatur secara komprehensif upaya terpadu untuk mengelola sumber daya alam dan lingkungan hidup yang menjadi kewenangan daerah yang meliputi proses perencanaan, pemanfaatan, pengembangan, pemeliharaan, pemulihan, pengawasan dan pengendalian sumber daya alam dan lingkungan hidup. Kedua, Perda Kabupaten Lampung Timur No. 3 Tahun 2002 tentang Rehabilitasi Pesisir, Pantai dan Laut Dalam Wilayah Kabupaten Lampung Timur. Sehubungan dengan pembangunan institusi hukum di daerah, maka regulasi daerah yang bertujuan melindungi (konservasi) SDA sangat dibutuhkan. Diharapkan pada tahun-tahun mendatang, pembentukan peraturan daerah yang khusus mengatur mengenai pencegahan pemanasan global dapat terwujud,

Sementara itu, pembangunan institusi hukum di daerah khususnya yang terkait dengan pencegahan pemanasan global haruslah didasarkan pada sebuah perencanaan yang matang dan sebaiknya diletakkan dalam kesatuan sistem pembentukan Program Legislasi Daerah sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 10 tahun 2004 Pasal 15 (2)  yang menyatakan bahwa “Perencanaan penyusunan Peraturan Daerah dilakukan dalam suatu Program Legislasi Daerah”. Program Legislasi Daerah yang selanjutnya disebut Prolegda adalah instrumen perencanaan pembentukan produk hukum daerah yang disusun secara terencana, terpadu dan sistematis. Tujuan penting keberadaan Prolegda adalah adanya skala prioritas Perda sesuai dengan perkembangan kebutuhan hukum di daerah serta menjaga agar produk Perda tetap berada dalam kesatuan sistem hukum nasional.  Namun demikian, amat disayangkan praktik penyusunan program legislasi daerah ini tidak dilakukan oleh setiap daerah sehingga pembangunan institusi hukum di daerah kadang tidak sistematis dan tidak sesuai dengan program yang direncanakan.  Alangkah baiknya jika pembangunan institusi hukum mengenai pencegahan pemanasan global diletakkan dalam suatu kerangka penyusunan program legislasi daerah sehingga harmonisasi dan keteraturan institusi hukum di daerah dapat terjaga.

4.  Kesimpulan

Dari perspektif hukum, pencegahan pemanasan global harus mengedepankan aspek sinergitas dari institusi hukum internasional, institusi hukum nasional, dan institusi hukum di daerah.  Dalam hal ini, komitmen Indonesia terhadap pencegahan pemanasan global tidak hanya dilakukan dengan meratifikasi  instrumen hukum internasional, namun juga harus diikuti oleh pembangunan institusi hukum nasional, dan lebih penting lagi adalah pembangunan institusi hukum di daerah.  Bukankah “the advance guard in the frontier” dalam rangka pencegahan pemanasan global adalah pemerintahan daerah di era desentralisasi ini.

5.  Kepustakaan

[1]  Coglianese, Cary. Social Movements, Law, and Society: The Institutionalization of the Environmental Movement. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 150, No. 1 (Nov., 2001), pp. 85-118.

[2] Stone, Christopher D. Beyond Rio: “Insuring” Against Global Warming. The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 86, No. 3 (Jul., 1992), pp. 445-488.

[3]  Davies, Peter G. G. Global Warming and the Kyoto Protocol. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 2 (Apr., 1998), pp. 446.

[4]  Wiener, Jonathan Baert. Global Environmental Regulation: Instrument Choice in Legal Context.  The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 108, No. 4 (Jan., 1999), pp. 677-800

[5] Keharusan Negara Maju Atasi Perubahan Iklim. Antara News tanggal 24 Oktober 2007 at: http://www.antara.co.id/arc/2007/10/24/keharusan-negara-maju-atasi-perubahan-iklim/

[6] Kelsen, Hans. 2006. Teori Umum tentang Hukum dan Negara. Bandung: Nusamedia & Nuansa.

dimuat di Harian Umum Lampung Post tanggal 24 November 2008, available at: http://www.lampungpost.com/cetak/berita.php?id=2008112320165721

Pendahuluan

Episode kejatuhan Bank Tripanca memunculkan suatu sisi permasalahan hukum dalam pengelolaan keuangan daerah. Adalah Pemkab Lampung Timur kali ini tersandung permasalahan hukum  terkait dengan penyimpanan dana APBD di Bank Tripanca. Pemberitaan Lampung Post tanggal 8 November 2008 menyebutkan bahwa Uang Pemerintah Kabupaten Lampung Timur yang disimpan di Bank Tripanca Setiadana Bandar Lampung mencapai Rp107 miliar. Pemkab memilih menyimpan di bank tersebut karena mengharapkan bunga besar.

Terhadap masalah ini, DPRD Lampung Timur pun segera membentuk Panitia Khusus (Pansus) untuk menyelidiki pengalihan simpanan dana APBD Rp107 miliar Lamtim ke PT Bank Tripanca Setiadana (Lampost, 9 November 2008). Permasalahan ini kemudian sampai pada Kepolisian dimana Polda Lampung menilai penyimpanan dana APBD Lampung Timur Rp107 miliar di Bank Tripanca masuk kategori tindak pidana korupsi. Sesuai dengan UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah pada penjelasan Pasal 193 Ayat (1), dana APBD tidak boleh disimpan atau didepositokan di bank nonpemerintah. “Kami temukan indikasi tindak pidana korupsi, unsur melawan hukumnya sudah jelas,” (Lampost, 19 November 2008)

Sementara itu, Pemkab Lamtim berpegang pada Permendagri No. 13 Tahun 2006 Tentang Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah, yang menyebutkan bupati dapat membuka rekening kas daerah di lebih dari satu bank yang sehat.  Sementara itu Pasal 193 Ayat (1) UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah menjelaskan dana APBD tidak boleh disimpan atau didepositokan di bank nonpemerintah (Lampost, 20 November 2008).  Pemkab Lampung Timur berdasarkan Permendagri No. 13 Tahun 2006 bersikeras bahwa penyimpanan dana APBD di Bank Tripanca tidak bertentangan dengan hukum. Bagaimanakah permasalahan ini dipandang dari segi hukum merupakan suatu hal yang menarik untuk didiskusikan bersama.

Negara Hukum, Hukum Positif, dan Hirarki Hukum

Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia merupakan negara hukum, ketentuan ini ditegaskan dalam Pasal 1 ayat (3) Undang-Undang Dasar 1945. Ketentuan ini mensyarakatkan bahwa hukum harus dipegang teguh dan setiap warga negara, dan aparatur negara harus mendasarkan tindakannya pada hukum. Berbicara mengenai hukum di Indonesia tidak akan lepas dari hukum positif yang berakar dari positivisme hukum yang dikembangkan oleh John Austin dilanjutkan oleh Hans Kelsen, dan disempurnakan oleh HLA HART.  Bagi sistem hukum Indonesia, Kelsen khususnya mempunyai arti mendalam sebagai peletak dasar teori hirarki hukum yang kemudian dijadikan landasan dalam menentukan validitas peraturan perundang-undangan di Indonesia.

Kelsen mengemukakan teorinya mengenai hirarki hukum. Ia berpendapat bahwa norma-norma hukum itu berjenjang-jenjang dan berlapis-lapis dalam suatu hirarki tata susunan. Ini berarti suatu norma yang lebih rendah berlaku, bersumber dan berdasar pada norma yang lebih tinggi, demikian seterusnya sampai pada suatu norma yang tidak dapat ditelusuri lebih lanjut dan bersifat hipotesis dan fiktif yaitu norma dasar. Suatu norma hukum itu keatas ia bersumber dan berdasar pada norma di atasnya, tetapi kebawah ia juga menjadi dasar dan menjadi sumber norma hukum di bawahnya, sehingga suatu norma hukum itu mempunyai masa berlaku yang relatif karena norma hukum itu berlaku tergantung pada norma yang diatasnya.

Dalam suatu sistem hukum, peraturan-peraturan hukum dikehendaki tidak ada yang bertentangan satu sama lain. Jika terjadi juga pertentangan karena hal ini tidak mustahil terjadi karena adanya berbagai kepentingan dalam masyarakat, akan berlaku secara konsisten asas-asas hukum, seperti lex specialis derogat legi generali, lex posterior derogat legi priori, atau lex superior derogat legi infriori.  Sesuai dengan toeri hirarki hukum, maka asas peraturan perundangan-undangan menyatakan bahwa peraturan hukum yang lebih rendah tidak boleh bertentangan dengan peraturan perundang-undangan di atasnya. Asas hukum ini mengisyaratkan ketika terjadi konflik antara peraturan perundang-undangan yang lebih tinggi dengan peraturan perundang-undangan yang lebih rendah, maka aturan yang lebih tinggi berdasar hirarkinya harus di dahulukan dan aturan yang lebih rendah harus disisihkan.

Dalam sistem hukum Indonesia, teori hirarki hukum ini dimanifestasikan dalam tata urutan peraturan perundang-undangan di Indonesia dalam instrumen hukum UU No. 10 Tahun 2004 tentang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan sebagai berikut:

  1. Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945;
  2. Undang-Undang/Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang;
  3. Peraturan Pemerintah;
  4. Peraturan Presiden;
  5. Peraturan Daerah.

Dengan demikian berdasarkan teori hirarki hukum, peraturan perundang-undangan dibawah UU misalnya Peraturan Pemerintah tidak boleh bertentangan dengan UU yang berada pada hirarki yang lebih tinggi.  Ketentuan ini berlaku pula terhadap hal lainnya sesuai dengan tingkatan hirarkinya masing-masing.

Sementara itu, Peraturan Perundang-Undangan yang melandasi pengelolaan pemerintahan daerah adalah UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah dan Peraturan Pemerintah No. 38 Tahun 2007 tentang Pembagian Urusan Pemerintahan antara Pemerintah, Pemerintahan Daerah Propinsi dan Pemerintahan Daerah Kabupaten/Kota; Kedua peraturan perundang-undangan ini menjadi dasar pelaksanaan otonomi daerah di Indonesia. Otonomi daerah memberikan hak, wewenang dan kewajiban kepada daerah otonom untuk mengatur dan mengurus rumah tangganya sendiri namun tetap dalam koridor sistem hukum dalam pengertian dilaksanakan berdasarkan hukum.

Oleh karena itu, ketika dihadapkan kepada konflik antara UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah dengan Permendagri No. 13 Tahun 2006 Tentang Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah, tentunya sesuai dengan teori hirarki hukum kita harus mendahulukan U No. 32 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah terhadap Permendagri No. 13 Tahun 2006 Tentang Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah. Disini kemudian timbul pertanyaan sejauh mana Permendagri No. 13 Tahun 2006 Tentang Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah dapat dijadikan dasar keberlakukan suatu kebijakan pengelolaan keuangan daerah, tentunya berdasarkan teori hirarki hukum jugalah kita harus mendasarkan jawaban kita.

Harus diingat bahwa peraturan perundang-undangan yang lebih rendah bersumber dan berdasar pada norma di atasnya artinya Permendagri No. 13 Tahun 2006 Tentang Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah berlaku sepanjang UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah tidak secara jelas mengatur mengenai pengelolaan keuangan daerah atau dengan kata lain jika ketentuan UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah menimbulkan multi interpretasi yang sangat luas.  Namun hal ini bukanlah yang terjadi dalam fenomena hukum APBD Pemkab Lampung Timur.

Pasal 193 Ayat (1) UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah menjelaskan dana APBD tidak boleh disimpan atau didepositokan di bank nonpemerintah. Pasal ini secara jelas memberikan norma larangan untuk menyimpan atau mendepositokan dana APBD di bank nonpemerintah, dengan kata lain dana APBD hanya dapat disimpan atau didepositokan di bank pemerintah; tidak perlu diperdebatkan lagi apakah Bank Tripanca termasuk kategori bank pemerintah atau nonpemerintah.  Sementara itu Permendagri No. 13 Tahun 2006 Tentang Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah, yang menyebutkan bupati dapat membuka rekening kas daerah di lebih dari satu bank yang sehat merupakan suatu ketentuan lanjutan dari ketentuan UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah dalam artian bank yang sehat ini haruslah masuk ke dalam kategori bank pemerintah sesuai teori hirarki hukum.

Kesimpulan

Fenomena hukum ini tidak seluruhnya merupakan kesalahan dari Pemkab Lampung Timur jika dilihat dari prinsip desentralisasi dan otonomi.  Otonomi daerah menimbulkan suatu tekanan terhadap Pemkab untuk meningkatkan PAD dengan memanfaatkan sumber-sumber finansial yang ada sehingga peluang untuk mendapatkan kesempatan peningkatan PAD dengan jalan deposito APBD menjadi salah satu pilihan dari Pemkab.  Fenomena ini merupakan suatu pelajaran agar tidak timbul suatu kejadian serupa yang dapat merusak ritme pemerintahan di suatu daerah. Tercatat sudah dua fenomena melalaikan aturan hirarki hukum terjadi di Lampung dimana salah satunya adalah kasus KPU Lampung Utara.  Pelajaran ini harus menjadi suatu bahan refleksi untuk lebih berusaha memahami hukum dan memegang teguh asas serta aturannya.

Oleh: Rudy | November 14, 2008

Kewenangan Pemda dalam Bidang Kelistrikan

1.  Kewenangan Otonom

Otonomi daerah adalah implementasi dari prinsip desentralisasi pemerintahan.  Pengertian otonomi di sini adalah bahwa daerah memiliki kewenangan melakukan pengelolaan wilayah baik melalui penerbitan kebijakan daerah dan membiayai dirinya tidak tergantung pada keuangan dari pusat.  Otonomi juga harus diartikan telah ada peralihan kewenangan-kewenangan tertentu dari pemerintah pusat ke pemerintah daerah. Otonomi daerah bukan sekedar gerakan desentralisasi yang membagi-bagi apa yang dulu di pusat agar ter-daerah-isasi, melainkan sebuah gerakan yang menjadi bagian dari upaya besar pembaruan menuju tata pemerintahan baru yang lebih baik [governance reform].

Otonomi daerah memberikan hak, wewenang dan kewajiban kepada daerah otonom untuk mengatur dan mengurus rumah tangganya sendiri. Penyelenggaraan pemerintah dibagi berdasarkan kriteria eksternalitas, akuntabilitas dan efisiensi dengan memperhatikan keserasian hubungan antar daerah. Urusan pemerintahan yang menjadi kewenangan pemda terdiri dari urusan wajib dan urusan pilihan sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 11 ayat (3) UU No. 32 Tahun 2004. Selanjutnya dalam bagian penjelasan ditegaskan bahwa urusan wajib merupakan  urusan yang sangat mendasar yang berkaitan dengan hak dan pelayanan dasar warga negara

Urusan wajib merupakan urusan yang harus diselenggarakan oleh pemerintah daerah dalam sistem otonomi daerah. Pemerintah daerah harus menjamin ketersediaan pelayanan baik dari sumber daya maupun dana. Sehubungan dengan hal tersebut, dalam mengelola kewenangan wajib tersebut pemerintah daerah dapat menggunakan instrumen perda. Sehubungan dengan hal itu Pasal 16 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 telah ditentukan bahwa hubungan dalam bidang pelayanan umum antara pemerintah dan pemerintahan daerah meliputi:

  1. Kewenangan, tanggung jawab dan penentuan standar pelayanan minimal;
  2. Pengalokasian pendanaan pelayanan umum yang menjadi kewenangan daerah;
  3. Fasilitasi pelaksanaan kerjasama antar pemerintahan daerah dalam penyelenggaraan pelayanan umum.

Ketentuan ini memberikan jaminan terhadap kepastian akan terselenggaranya pelayanan dasar yang minimal serta ketersediaan dana dalam melakukan pelayanan. Sehubungan dengan hal itu pemerintah daerah akan dituntut akuntabilatas pelayanan yang telah diselenggarakannya oleh masyarakat sebagai konsumen.

Semangat yang mendasari penyelenggaraan otonomi adalah peningkatan kesejahteraan masyarakat dengan selalu memperhatikan kepentingan dan aspirasi yang tumbuh dalam masyarakat. Kesejahteraan merupakan visi tertinggi dari otonomi daerah dan oleh karena itu maka arah otonomi daerah adalah akselarasi/percepatan terwujudnya kesejahteraan masyarakat melalui peningkatan, pelayanan, pemberdayaan, dan peran serta masyarakat.   Proses percepatan tersebut dilandaskan pada prinsip demokrasi, pemerataan, keadilan, keisitimeweaan dan kekhususan suatu daerah. Selain itu juga harus dilandaskan pada prinsip efisiensi dan efektifitas penyelenggaraan pemerintahan. Semangat dan prinsip-prinsip dasar tersebut tertuang dalam bagian menimbang Undang-undang nomor 32 tahun 2004 yang sekaligus merupakan legal spirit penyelenggaraan pemerintahan daerah yang berlandasakan pada sisitem otonomi yang seluas-luasnya.

Dalam hakekat pelaksanaan otonomi daerah, Pemerintah Daerah ditugaskan menggantikan peran Pemerintah Pusat dalam memberikan pelayanan kepada masyarakat. Ternyata sampai saat ini, banyak kebijakan di daerah yang justru jauh dari harapan masyarakatnya. Kecenderungan elite lokal untuk memanipulasi kebijakan desentralisasi demi memperkuat posisi mereka dengan “mengorbankan” kelompok marjinal sebenarnya juga terjadi di banyak negara. Griffin dalam Turner and Hulme (1997) melalui risetnya di beberapa negara telah menyuarakan kekhawatirannya mengenai kecenderungan ini:

…it is conceivable, even likely in many countries, that power at the local level is more concentrated, more elitist and applied more ruthlessly against the poor than at the centre…greater decentralization does not necessarily imply greater democracy let alone ‘power to the people’ – it all depends on the circumstances under which decentralization occurs.

Semangat yang mendasari penyelenggaraan otonomi adalah peningkatan kesejahteraan masyarakat dengan selalu memperhatikan kepentingan dan aspirasi yang tumbuh dalam masyarakat. Kesejahteraan merupakan visi tertinggi dari otonomi daerah dan oleh karena itu maka arah otonomi daerah adalah akselerasi/percepatan terwujudnya kesejahteraan masyarakat melalui peningkatan, pelayanan, pemberdayaan, dan peran serta masyarakat.   Proses percepatan tersebut dilandaskan pada prinsip demokrasi, pemerataan, keadilan, keisitimeweaan dan kekhususan suatu daerah. Selain itu, juga harus dilandaskan pada prinsip efisiensi dan efektifitas penyelenggaraan pemerintahan. Semangat dan prinsip-prinsip dasar tersebut tertuang dalam bagian menimbang UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 yang sekaligus merupakan legal spirit penyelenggaraan pemerintah-an daerah yang berlandasakan pada sistem otonomi yang seluas-luasnya.

2.  Pemetaan Kewenangan Pemda mengenai Ketenagalistrikan

Pemetaan kewenangan pemerintah daerah dalam mengatur penyelanggaraan dan pelayanan bidang kelistrikan diperlukan untuk memperoleh legitimasi dan landasan hukum yang cukup. Landasan hukum yang cukup akan menjamin keabsahan kewenangan pemerintah daerah dalam menyusun sebuah kebijakan dalam bentuk Perda. Selain itu pemetaan kewenangan juga dibutuhkan agar Perda yang akan disusun tidak bertentangan dengan peraturan yang lebih tinggi.  Sehubungan dengan hal tersebut akan dipetakan substansi peraturan perundang-undangan yang mengatur tentang kewenangan Pemda dalam penyelenggaraan dan pelayanan bidang ketenagalistrikan. Berikut ini diuraikan substansi ketentuan peraturan perundangan yang paling mendasar yang mengatur tentang kewenangan pemerintah daerah tersebut di atas:

-UU Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah-

Otonomi daerah memberikan hak, wewenang dan kewajiban kepada daerah otonom untuk mengatur dan mengurus rumah tangganya sendiri. Bidang Ketenagalistrikan sendiri tidak diatur dengan jelas dalam UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah, namun apabila ditinjau dari sisi pelayanan dasar warga negara terutama pelayanan ketenagalistrikan pada desa yang belum terjangkau jaringan PLN maka bidang ketenagalistrikan merupakan suatu urusan wajib yang harus diperhatikan oleh pemerintahan daerah kabupaten/kota .

Sehubungan dengan kepentingan penyelenggaraan urusan bidang ketenagalistrikan yang berkaitan dengan pemenuhan hak dan pelayanan dasar warga negara serta kewenangan untuk melakukan regulasi atas urusan otonomnya, maka ketentuan tersebut di atas merupakan landasan yang layak untuk pembentukan perda ketenagalistrikan.

-PP No. 38 Tahun 2007 tentang Pembagian Urusan Pemerintahan antara Pemerintah, Pemerintahan Daerah Propinsi, dan Pemerintahan Daerah Kabupaten/Kota-

UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah dijabarkan lebih lanjut dalam Peraturan Pemerintah No. 38 Tahun 2007 tentang Pembagian Urusan Pemerintahan antara Pemerintah, Pemerintahan Daerah Propinsi, dan Pemerintahan Daerah Kabupaten/Kota.

Urusan yang menjadi kewenangan daerah terdiri dari urusan wajib dan urusan pilihan. Urusan pemerintahan wajib adalah urusan pemerintahan yang wajib diselenggarakan oleh pemerintahan daerah yang terkait dengan pelayanan dasar (basic services) bagi masyarakat, seperti pendidikan dasar, kesehatan, lingkungan hidup, perhubungan, kependudukan dan sebagainya. Urusan pemerintahan yang bersifat pilihan adalah urusan pemerintahan yang diprioritaskan oleh pemerintahan daerah untuk diselenggarakan yang terkait dengan upaya mengembangkan potensi unggulan (core competence) yang menjadi kekhasan daerah.

Urusan pemerintahan di luar urusan wajib dan urusan pilihan yang diselenggarakan oleh pemerintahan daerah, sepanjang menjadi kewenangan daerah yang bersangkutan tetap harus diselenggarakan oleh pemerintahan daerah yang bersangkutan. Sehubungan dengan hal tersebut di atas, dalam mengelola urusan wajib, urusan pilihan, dan urusan sisa tersebut pemerintahan daerah dapat menggunakan instrumen perda.

PP No. 38 Tahun 2007 menyatakan dengan jelas bahwa bidang ketenagalistrikan merupakan sub bidang energi dan sumberdaya mineral yang termasuk dalam urusan pemerintahan pilihan pemerintahan kabupaten/kota.  Lebih jelasnya PP No. 38 Tahun 2007 memetakan kewenangan pemerintahan daerah kabupaten/kota di sub bidang ketenagalistrikan sebagaimana dinyatakan di bawah ini:

  1. Penetapan peraturan daerah kabupaten/kota di bidang energi dan ketenagalistrikan.
  2. Penetapan Rencana Umum Ketenagalistrikan Daerah (RUKD) kabupaten/kota.
  3. Pemberian IUKU yang sarana maupun energi listriknya dalam kabupaten/kota.
  4. Pengaturan harga jual tenaga listrik untuk konsumen pemegang
  5. IUKU yang izin usahanya dikeluarkan oleh kabupaten/kota.
  6. Pengaturan harga jual tenaga listrik kepada pemegang IUKU yang izinnya dikeluarkan oleh kabupaten/kota.
  7. Pemberian IUKS yang sarana instalasinya dalam kabupaten/kota.
  8. Pemberian persetujuan penjualan kelebihan tenaga listrik oleh pemegang IUKS kepada pemegang IUKU yang izinnya dikeluarkan oleh kabupaten/kota.
  9. Pemberian izin usaha jasa penunjang tenaga listrik bagi badan usaha dalam negeri/mayoritas sahamnya dimiliki oleh penanam modal dalam negeri.
  10. Pembinaaan dan pengawasan pelaksanaan usaha ketenagalistrikan yang izinnya diberikan oleh kabupaten/kota.
  11. Penyediaan listrik pedesaan di wilayah kabupaten/kota.
  12. Pengangkatan dan pembinaan inspektur ketenagalistrikan serta pembinaan jabatan fungsional kabupaten/kota.

Dengan demikian Pemda mempunyai kewenangan di sub bidang ketenagalistrikan berdasarkan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku dan demikian menjadi suatu landasan hukum yang kuat untuk melaksanakan kewenangan di bidang ketenagalistrikan yang akan dituangkan dalam instrumen Perda Ketenagalistrikan.

Oleh: Rudy | November 14, 2008

Legal Pluralism Vs Unification

The legal system in Indonesia has been marked by the long struggle to construct a system based on the pattern of the family or community as set forth by the Constitution. Indonesia inherited a complex legal system whose main component parts were western law, adat law, and Islamic law.  This complex legal system basically features the special characteristic of Indonesia community and made the birth of unification supporters and legal pluralism  supporters.

Amidst the desire to construct a strong unitary state, Seoepomo who was the great supporter of legal pluralism, however, was able to provide the basic provision in Indonesia 1945 Constitution to protect legal pluralism .  It may be said that Indonesia 1945 Constitution greatly accommodated the law from the top and law from below but did not give the way to negotiate between the two. However, attachment to the traditional communal life conflicts with modernization and industrialization. Since that time, the legal pluralism versus unification became great national issue.

Since 1959, pressure for the establishment of a system of national law has increased followed by the desire to unify national legal system. Indonesian jurist trained in Netherlands were not only greatly influenced by western law but also lost sight of their own indigenous legal institution and the reality of the society . The result was scholars and jurists with the strong desire on creating modern and unified legal system.  In addition, Utrecht  has pointed out that the desire for codification and unification cannot be separated from the idea of eenheidsgedachte of the unified state proclaimed in 1945.

The period of Old Order and New Order showed the efforts for unification in every aspect of Indonesian life including the unification of law system. The unification was greatly seen during New Order period with two goals they value highly, national unity and economic development .  That model of how development goals should be attained greatly influenced government policies and institutions.  It also profoundly affected national legal system and the way of government official, lawyers, and legal scholar thought about law and development.  Meanwhile in the regions located very far from Jakarta, adat law mostly guides people daily life . This never-ending contest between legal pluralism and unification is not only happen in Indonesia but also happen across the world in Asia , Africa , and Latin America .

Asian Crisis 1997 witnessed the fall of New Order and the beginning of democratization in Indonesia followed by the historic amendment of Indonesia 1945 Constitution along with the decentralization idea across the country. The decentralization idea gives some room for the implementation of local law as witnessed by the rebirth of many adat institutions and its law from Sumatera to Papua .  Even though many scholars are pessimistic on the importance of adat law or customary law in diverse and indigenous country , the great disaster of Tsunami that stroke Aceh in 2004 shows us that when the formal law cannot administer the law problem after Tsunami, Aceh adat law become an effective solution for many land and inheritance problem.  For some reason, the adat justice system is more comprehensible and accessible than the formal justice system .  This condition also happens in Africa where the customary laws are so flexible in responding to the circumstances of the particular case .  These laws may differ from Western laws in failing to provide definitive answers to certain issues. But Western laws fail to provide definitive answers to other issues that customary laws regulate more fully.

This little blessing of Tsunami and the experience of Africa Nation shall remind us to rethink when pursuing modern legal system without considering the local genuine of one country especially in the country where the diversity of customary law is evident . For Indonesia, this heterogeneity needs to serve as a starting point for any legal pluralism assessment and the search for institutional law building. Localities that have in the past chaffed under central arrangements that have led to stay silent to implement their unique legal system would now be in position to forge ahead through improved space to implement their local law while pursuing the genuine Indonesia legal system .

At the same time, the world has witnessed the rapid spread of constitutionalism and judicial review. Over one hundred countries and several supra-national entities across the globe establish constitutional supremacy in one form or another . The rise of constitutionalism is followed by the gradual emergence of new constitutional court, that in many of these countries have been responsible for translating these constitutional provisions into practical guidelines to be used in daily public life. Many of these courts have become significant, even powerful-actors .  Despite the growing number of academic works on the relationship among constitution, minority rights, and judicial review , it might be argued that a little attention paid to the relation between constitutional court and the protection of customary law especially in culturally divided societies .

I. Pendahuluan

Kebijakan Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) secara global sudah menjadi tuntutan zaman, tuntutan ini berawal dari international human rights standard settings yang dipelopori oleh Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa (PBB) dibidang legislasi. Pemikiran mengenai konsepsi hak asasi manusia yang sejak lama berkembang dalam wacana para ilmuwan sejak era enlightenment di Eropa, meningkat menjadi dokumen-dokumen hukum internasional yang resmi. Puncak perkembangannya adalah dirumuskannya Universal Declaration of Human Rights atau disebut dengan Deklarasi Universal Hak Asasi Manusia (DUHAM) pada tahun 1948, dan deklarasi ini telah diratifikasi oleh seluruh negara di dunia dan menjadi hukum dasar pengakuan HAM di masing-masing negara.

Pada perkembangan selanjutnya, konsepsi hak asasi manusia mencakup pula upaya menjamin pemenuhan kebutuhan hak-hak sipil dan politik serta untuk mengejar kemajuan ekonomi, sosial, dan kebudayaan, termasuk hak atas pendidikan, hak untuk penemuan-penemuan ilmiah, dan lain-lain sebagainya. Puncak perkembangan hal tersebut diatas dengan ditandatanganinya Civil and Political Rights dan International Couvenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Right.

Bagi suatu negara demokrasi, pengakuan dan perlindungan terhadap hak asasi manusia merupakan pilar yang utama. Sementara itu, pengakuan dan perlindungan hak asasi manusia mendapat tempat yang utama dan dapat dikatakan sebagai salah satu tujuan Negara hukum. Dengan demikian, Indonesia sebagai suatu negara hukum yang demokratis harus memasukkan unsur-unsur pengakuan dan perlindungan HAM dalam konstitusinya. UUD 1945 pasca amandemen sedikit banyak mengakomodasi substansi HAM Ekosob dalam ketentuan-ketentuannya. Perubahan kedua Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 menyempurnakan komitmen Indonesia terhadap upaya pemajuan dan perlindungan HAM dengan mengintegrasikan ketentuan-ketentuan penting dari instrumen-instrumen internasional mengenai HAM, sebagaimana tercantum dalam BAB XA tentang Hak Asasi Manusia. Perubahan tersebut dipertahankan sampai dengan perubahan keempat Undang-Undang Dasar 1945.

II. Hukuman Mendidik: Pisau Bermata Dua

Dalam proses pendidikan, yaitu dalam proses pembentukan kepribadian anak, kita mengenal apa yang disebut alat pendidikan. Alat pendidikan dipergunakan agar dalam pembentukan kepribadian anak itu dapat berjalan dengan baik. Alat-alat pendidikan yang kita kenal di antaranya adalah contoh dan teladan; ancaman dan ganjaran; perintah dan larangan; serta hukuman.

Alat pendidikan berupa hukuman kadang-kadang memang terpaksa harus digunakan. Dalam kaitan ini, ada beberapa teori tentang hukuman yang dianut oleh beberapa ahli pendidikan. Rosseau memperkenalkan hukuman alam. Artinya, anak dihukum berdasarkan perbuatannya. Umpama main pisau dia terluka, memanjat dia terjatuh, dan mungkin patah tangannya. Hukuman alam ini bila dibiarkan akan berbahaya bagi si anak. Oleh sebab itu tidak banyak pendidik yang mempergunakan atau memakai teori ini. Ada lagi teori menjerakan, yakni anak dihukum agar ia tidak mengulangi perbuatan. Contohnya, bila terlambat datang ke sekolah, ia tidak diperkenankan mengikuti jam pelajaran di mana ia terlambat.

Secara historis mulai era orde lama sampai era orde baru, hukuman fisik seperti menjewer atau menyetrap kerap dilakukan oleh pendidik, baik di tingkat sekolah dasar sampai dengan sekolah lanjutan atas. Hukuman tersebut dirasakan oleh guru sangat ampuh untuk mendidik peserta didik agar lebih berdisiplin dalam melakukan proses pendidikan. Seiring dengan reformasi, disertai dengan gelombang hak asasi manusia di Indonesia, alat pendidikan berupa hukuman fisik menjadi suatu hukuman yang dianggap melanggar hak asasi manusia peserta didik. Hal ini diperparah dengan banyaknya kasus hukuman mendidik yang diselewengkan menjadi suatu penganiayaan terhadap peserta didik.

Hal ini menyebabkan perubahan perspektif masyarakat dan penegak hukum (kepolisian) dalam melihat hukuman fisik yang mendidik. Hukuman fisik yang dahulu dianggap sebagai suatu alat pendidikan, lambat laun dilihat sebagai suatu bentuk pelanggaran ham anak. Keadaan ini merupakan pisau bermata dua bagi guru, disatu pihak tanpa hukuman mendidik anak didik sulit dikendalikan dan cenderung membandel; di lain pihak apabila guru menerapkan hukuman mendidik secara fisik dapat menyebabkan guru yang bersangkutan dilaporkan ke pihak kepolisian karena melakukan penganiayaan dan pelanggaran ham.

III. Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Profesi Guru

Pasal 3 UU No. 20 Tahun 2003 Tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional menyatakan bahwa Pendidikan nasional berfungsi mengembangkan kemampuan dan membentuk watak serta peradaban bangsa yang bermartabat dalam rangka mencerdaskan kehidupan bangsa, bertujuan untuk berkembangnya potensi peserta didik agar menjadi manusia yang beriman dan bertakwa kepada Tuhan Yang Maha Esa, berakhlak mulia, sehat, berilmu, cakap, kreatif, mandiri, dan menjadi warga negara yang demokratis serta bertanggung jawab. Pasal ini memberikan gambaran bahwa fungsi guru dalam sistem pendidikan nasional adalah sebagai pengajar sekaligus sebagai pendidik.

Terbatasinya hak guru dalam memberikan hukuman mendidik dalam jangka panjang dapat menyebabkan mundurnya kualitas pendidikan di Indonesia karena secara tidak langsung peran guru terbatasi hanya sebagai “pengajar” dan kehilangan perannya sebagai “pendidik”. Sementara itu, pendidikan sering dijadikan sebagai indikator dalam mengukur kemajuan suatu bangsa. Peranan pendidikan dalam proses pembangunan sumber daya manusia dan pembangunan secara keseluruhan telah diakui oleh semua bangsa beradab di dunia, bahkan faktor kunci dari keberhasilan Negara maju di dunia seperti Jepang, USA, dan Singapura adalah pendidikan. Oleh karena itulah, perlindungan hukum bagi guru menjadi sangat signifikan agar guru dapat menjalankan perannya tidak hanya sebagai pengajar tetapi juga sebagai pendidik.

Pasal 14 ayat (1) UU No. 14 Tahun 2005 menetapkan bahwa dalam melaksanakan tugas keprofesionalan, guru berhak:

  1. memperoleh penghasilan di atas kebutuhan hidup minimum dan jaminan kesejahteraan sosial;
  2. mendapatkan promosi dan penghargaan sesuai dengan tugas dan prestasi kerja;
  3. memperoleh perlindungan dalam melaksanakan tugas dan hak atas kekayaan intelektual;
  4. memperoleh kesempatan untuk meningkatkan kompetensi;
  5. memperoleh dan memanfaatkan sarana dan prasarana pembelajaran untuk menunjang kelancaran tugas keprofesionalan;
  6. memiliki kebebasan dalam memberikan penilaian dan ikut menentukan kelulusan, penghargaan, dan/atau sanksi kepada peserta didik sesuai dengan kaidah pendidikan, kode etik guru, dan peraturan perundangundangan;
  7. memperoleh rasa aman dan jaminan keselamatan dalam melaksanakan tugas;
  8. memiliki kebebasan untuk berserikat dalam organisasi profesi;
  9. memiliki kesempatan untuk berperan dalam penentuan kebijakan pendidikan;
  10. memperoleh kesempatan untuk mengembangkan dan meningkatkan kualifikasi akademik dan kompetensi; dan/atau
  11. memperoleh pelatihan dan pengembangan profesi dalam bidangnya.

Selain menetapkan hak-hak guru di atas, UU No. 14 Tahun 2005 telah menetapkan juga perlindungan terhadap guru dalam melaksanakan tugas profesinya sebagaimana ditentukan dalam Pasal 39 yaitu:

  1. Pemerintah, pemerintah daerah, masyarakat, organisasi profesi, dan/atau satuan pendidikan wajib memberikan perlindungan terhadap guru dalam pelaksanaan tugas.
  2. Perlindungan meliputi perlindungan hukum, perlindungan profesi, serta perlindungan keselamatan dan kesehatan kerja.
  3. Perlindungan hukum mencakup perlindungan hukum terhadap tindak kekerasan, ancaman, perlakuan diskriminatif, intimidasi, atau perlakuan tidak adil dari pihak peserta didik, orang tua peserta didik, masyarakat, birokrasi, atau pihak lain.
  4. Perlindungan profesi mencakup perlindungan terhadap pemutusan hubungan kerja yang tidak sesuai dengan peraturan perundangundangan, pemberian imbalan yang tidak wajar, pembatasan dalam menyampaikan pandangan, pelecehan terhadap profesi, dan pembatasan/pelarangan lain yang dapat menghambat guru dalam melaksanakan tugas.
  5. Perlindungan keselamatan dan kesehatan kerja mencakup perlindungan terhadap risiko gangguan keamanan kerja, kecelakaan kerja, kebakaran pada waktu kerja, bencana alam, kesehatan lingkungan kerja, dan/atau risiko lain.

Sementara itu, Rancangan Peraturan Pemerintah Tentang Guru dalam Pasal 36 ditetapkan bahwa:

  1. Guru berhak mendapat perlindungan dalam melaksanakan tugas dalam bentuk rasa aman dan jaminan keselamatan dari Pemerintah, pemerintah daerah, badan hukum penyelenggara pendidikan, satuan pendidikan, organisasi profesi, dan/atau masyarakat sesuai kewenangan masing-masing.
  2. Rasa aman dan jaminan keselamatan dalam melaksanakan tugas diperoleh guru melalui perlindungan hukum, profesi, keselamatan, dan kesehatan kerja.
  3. Masyarakat, organisasi profesi guru, Pemerintah atau Pemerintah Daerah dapat saling membantu dalam memberikan perlindungan.

Dari beberapa ketentuan hukum di atas, dapat dilihat bahwa guru mendapat jaminan perlindungan hukum dalam melaksanakan tugas profesinya dan organisasi profesi guru dalam hal ini mempunyai peran yang strategis dalam memberikan perlindungan ini. Hal ini juga ditegaskan dalam UU No. 14 Tahun 2005 dalam Pasal 42 yang menyatakan bahwa Organisasi profesi guru mempunyai kewenangan:

  1. menetapkan dan menegakkan kode etik guru;
  2. memberikan bantuan hukum kepada guru;
  3. memberikan perlindungan profesi guru;
  4. melakukan pembinaan dan pengembangan profesi guru; dan
  5. memajukan pendidikan nasional.

Dalam kaitannya dengan permasalahan hukuman mendidik yang bagaikan pisau bermata dua, organisasi profesi sebenarnya dapat berperan dalam perlindungan hukum bagi guru melalui beberapa cara yaitu:

  1. Membuat kode etik guru yang di dalamnya terdapat batasan baku mengenai hukuman mendidik dan bagaimana guru mendapat perlindungan hukum dalam pelaksanaan hukuman mendidik tersebut; Kode etik ini telah diamanatkan oleh UU No, 14 Tahun 2005 dan sebagaimana telah ditentukan dalam Pasal 43 UU No. 14 Tahun 2005, kode etik guru berisi norma dan etika yang mengikat perilaku guru dalam pelaksanaan tugas keprofesionalan.
  2. Penafsiran apakah suatu hukuman mendidik dapat dikategorikan sebagai penganiayaan dan pelanggaran HAM berada pada ranah praktis di Pihak Kepolisian; Oleh karena itu organisasi profesi perlu membentuk MoU dengan Pihak Kepolisian mengenai perlindungan hukum terhadap guru dalam melaksanakan tugas profesionalnya;
  3. Melakukan pelatihan-pelatihan mengenai pengajaran beorientasi HAM dengan melibatkan ahli pendidikan, psikolog, guru, dan stakeholders terkait.

Older Posts »

Kategori

Ikuti

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.