Constitutional Court Verdict on "Error In Objecto" Lawsuit in Dispute Over Regional Election Results
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15642/ad.2022.12.2.171-195Keywords:
Perselisihan Hasil Pilkada, Mahkamah Konstitusi, Error In Objecto, dispute of the election regional leader, constitutional courtAbstract
Abstract:
The settlement of cases resulting from the Regional Head Election (Pilkada) is still within the authority of the Constitutional Court. In deciding this case, the Constitutional Court made explicit regulations regarding the procedural law of the trial as outlined in the Constitutional Court Regulations. One of the problems that arise in the examination (trial) of disputes over the results of the regional elections is that the application submitted by the losing party (applicant) turns out to be the wrong object (error in objecto). This error usually occurs because the object being sued is not the final decision on the election results. This research is a normative juridical research that aims to examine the attitudes and decisions of the Constitutional Court regarding requests for disputes over Regional Head Elections (Pilkada) that are Error In Objecto. The result of this study is that the Plaintiff in making the application must clearly not be mistaken in determining the object. In the case/dispute over the results of the regional elections, the object of the lawsuit is the final decree of the General Elections Commission regarding the determination of the results of the election results and not others. Accuracy in making posita and petitum is very important because wrong posita and petitum will lead to the wrong and fatal determination of the object of the application. When this is the issue, the Constitutional Court will not accept the application because it is not authorized. An error in determining the object of this application in procedural law is termed error in objecto, so accuracy as an applicant, respondent, or related party is needed. The recommendation given is that the plaintiff should be more careful in making applications and the revision of the application given by the Constitutional Court at the preliminary hearing, can be used by the applicant to correct his application so as not to incorrectly determine the object of the application/error in objecto.
Downloads
References
Albab AF, M. Abid Ulil, Problem Kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi Memutus Perselisihan Hasil Pilkada, Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 48 No.3, 2018.
A, Rahmat, dan M Halimi. Penuntun Belajar Tata Negara. Bandung: Ganeca Exact Bandung. 1996.
Asih, Ni Kadek Lila Arsa Sari dan I Wayan Eka Artajaya. Kajian Hukum Terhadap Sengketa Hak Atas Tanah Milik Pura Kahyangan Badung (Studi Kasus Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Denpasar No. 565/Pdt.G//2018/PN.DPS). Jurnal Hukum Mahasiswa Volume 01 No 02, Oktober 2021.
Asrun, A. Muhammad. Hukum Acara Sengketa Pemilu Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia, Depok: Rajawali Pers, 2020.
Fatkhurohman, Dian Aminudin, et.al. Memahami Keberadaan Mahkamah Konstitusi di Indonesia, Bandung: PT. Citra Adya Bakti, 2004.
Hapsari, Heppy Indah. Studi Putusan yang Tidak Dapat Dieksekusi (Non Eksekutable) Dalam Perkara Perdata (Studi Putusan Nomor 16/Pdt.Plw/2014/PN.Kdl). Jurnal Verstek, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2018.
Harahap, M. Yahya. Hukum Acara Perdata. Jakarta: Sinar grafika, 2015.
Kamus KBBI - Kamus Lengkap Online - KamusLengkap.ID
Rahmawati, Nurlaili. Penanganan Perselisihan Hasil Pilkada Kota Serang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi, Ahkam, Volume 6, Nomor 2, November 2018.
Rahmawati, Nurlaili dan Sigit Nurhadi Nugraha. Penyelesaian Perselisihan Hasil Pemilihan Umum Serentak dalam Perspektif Keadilan. Al Wasath. Volume 4. No. 1. 2023.
Ayu, Putri, dan Asri Wijayanti. “Error in Persona Dalam Gugatan Perselisihan Hak Di Pengadilan Hubungan Industrial”. Supremasi Jurnal Hukum Vol. 3, No. 2.
R. Nazriyah. “Penyelesaian Sengketa Pilkada Setelah Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 97/PUU-XI/2013”. Jurnal Konstitusi. Volume 12, Nomor 3, September 2015.
Siahaan, Maruarar. Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2012.
Soekanto, Soerjono. Pengantar Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia, 1986.
Soemitro, Ronny Hanitijo. Metodologi Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia, 1983.
Valerna, J.L.K. Modul Metode Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 2009.
Regulations
Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 15 Tahun 2008 tentang Pedoman Beracara Dalam Perselihan Hasil Pemilihan Kepala Daerah.
Peraturan Mahkamah Kontitusi Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 tentang Pedoman Beracara Dalam Perkara Perselisihan Hasil Pemilihan Gubernur, Bupati, dan Walikota.
Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 5 Tahun 2017 tentang Pedoman Beracara Dalam Perkara Perselisihan Hasil Pemilihan Gubernur, Bupati, dan Walikota.
Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 6 Tahun 2020 tentang Tata Beracara Dalam Perkara Perselisihan Hasil Pemilihan Gubernur, Bupati, dan Walikota.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 34/PHP.BUP-XIV/2016.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 13/PHP.KOT-XVI/2018.
Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.
Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 2016 tentang Pemilihan Gubernur, Bupati, dan Walikota.
Undang-Undang Nomor 22 Tahun 2007 tentang Penyelenggaraan Pemilihan Umum (Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2007 Nomor 59, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 4721)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Al-Daulah: Jurnal Hukum dan Perundangan Islam
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
