Abstract
Law Number 31 of 2002 regarding Political Parties provides authority to the Minister of Law and Human Rights to register changes in the leadership of political parties was previously intended as a state administrator in the field of law and politics. The problem arises when the authority given in 2002 slowly shifted to become a government tool to obtain the support of political parties which is very dangerous for democracy and parties’ independency. Settlement of political parties’ leadership conflict is an integral part of the registration of political parties’ leadership therefore an ideal dispute settlement model is needed. This paper is the result of a research on the Court judgments in the dispute of political parties’ leadership. Ultimately this paper offers a One Roof Political Judgment Concept where one justice agency is empowered with an overall authority starting from the authority to examine the properness of the political party leadership at the central level and the Official decision regarding changes in the political party’s leadership at the central level by Bawaslu. During all this time the General Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) itself has acted as quasi justice given the authority to adjudicate all issues of the general election involving political parties. Bawaslu itself consist of professionals in the field of general election which are not affiliated to the political parties and controlled by the Election Advisory Board (DKPP). Through this model Political parties, KPU and Bawaslu shall become a sub-sub system of the political justice system in Indonesia.
Highlights
IntroductionThe existence of political parties (political parties) is one indicator of the progress of democracy
The existence of political parties is one indicator of the progress of democracy
One of the most frequent internal party conflicts in Indonesia over the last five years is related to the stewardship of political parties and their registration
Summary
The existence of political parties (political parties) is one indicator of the progress of democracy. If there is still a conflict, the Menkum HAM is prohibited to issue the registration decision on the changes in such political party’s leadership until the conflict is resolved or there is a legal judgment with a fixed legal force Such prohibition beside being a universal principle for any entity or official, as regulated in Law Number 2 of 2008 regarding Political Parties.. This may occur when the main function of the Menkum HAM towards the Political Party which previously only as state administrator in the field of law becomes a power tool. The reality of law is often determined by the underlying political configuration (Mahfud MD, 2006: 65)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
