KEKUATAN MENGIKAT PUTUSAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI TERHADAP MAHKAMAH AGUNG

KEKUATAN MENGIKAT PUTUSAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI TERHADAP MAHKAMAH AGUNG

The Existence of Supreme Court ruling that punishes dr. Bambang suprapto.Sp.M.Surg. using article 76 of law no 29 of 2004 on medical practices that had previously been cancelled by the Constitutional Court it self has proved that the Supreme Court has ruled constitutional the constitutional court�...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Rian Van Frits Kapitan
Format: Article
Language:Indonesian
Published: University of Diponegoro, Faculty of Law 2015-10-01
Series:Masalah-Masalah Hukum
Subjects:
Binding Force, Constitutional Review, Constitutional Court, Supreme Court, Kekuatan Mengikat, Constitutional Review, Mahkamah Konstitusi, Mahkamah Agung
Online Access:https://ejournal.undip.ac.id/index.php/mmh/article/view/11469
id doaj-2cc9a8b8a5664509adfe2db65260cf77
record_format Article
spelling doaj-2cc9a8b8a5664509adfe2db65260cf772020-11-24T22:03:09ZindUniversity of Diponegoro, Faculty of LawMasalah-Masalah Hukum2086-26952527-47162015-10-0144451152010.14710/mmh.44.4.2015.511-5209197KEKUATAN MENGIKAT PUTUSAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI TERHADAP MAHKAMAH AGUNGRian Van Frits KapitanThe Existence of Supreme Court ruling that punishes dr. Bambang suprapto.Sp.M.Surg. using article 76 of law no 29 of 2004 on medical practices that had previously been cancelled by the Constitutional Court it self has proved that the Supreme Court has ruled constitutional the constitutional court's decision. This paper attempts to justify that by reason of any Constitutional Court still has binding force for the Supreme Court. It is based on four perspectives namely: 1. Historical perspective 2. Perspective protected object 3. Perspective functional 4. And normative perspectiv Adanya putusan Mahkamah Agung yang menghukum dr. Bambang Suprapto, Sp.M.Surg mengunakan Pasal 76 Undang-Undang Nomor 29 Tahun 2004 tentang Praktek Kedokteran yang sebelumnya telah dibatalkan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dengan sendirinya telah membuktikan bahwa Mahkamah Agung telah mengesampingkan putusan constitutional review Mahkamah Konstitusi. Tulisan ini mencoba untuk menjustifikasi bahwa dengan alasan apapun putusan constitutional review Mahkamah Konstitusi tetap mempunyai kekuatan mengikat bagi Mahkamah Agung. Hal ini didasarkan atas empat perspektif, yaitu : 1.perspektif historis, 2.perspektif objek yang dilindungi, 3.perspektif fungsional, dan 4.perspektif normatifhttps://ejournal.undip.ac.id/index.php/mmh/article/view/11469Binding Force, Constitutional Review, Constitutional Court, Supreme Court, Kekuatan Mengikat, Constitutional Review, Mahkamah Konstitusi, Mahkamah Agung
collection DOAJ
language Indonesian
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Rian Van Frits Kapitan
spellingShingle Rian Van Frits Kapitan
KEKUATAN MENGIKAT PUTUSAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI TERHADAP MAHKAMAH AGUNG
Masalah-Masalah Hukum
Binding Force, Constitutional Review, Constitutional Court, Supreme Court, Kekuatan Mengikat, Constitutional Review, Mahkamah Konstitusi, Mahkamah Agung
author_facet Rian Van Frits Kapitan
author_sort Rian Van Frits Kapitan
title KEKUATAN MENGIKAT PUTUSAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI TERHADAP MAHKAMAH AGUNG
title_short KEKUATAN MENGIKAT PUTUSAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI TERHADAP MAHKAMAH AGUNG
title_full KEKUATAN MENGIKAT PUTUSAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI TERHADAP MAHKAMAH AGUNG
title_fullStr KEKUATAN MENGIKAT PUTUSAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI TERHADAP MAHKAMAH AGUNG
title_full_unstemmed KEKUATAN MENGIKAT PUTUSAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI TERHADAP MAHKAMAH AGUNG
title_sort kekuatan mengikat putusan constitutional review mahkamah konstitusi terhadap mahkamah agung
publisher University of Diponegoro, Faculty of Law
series Masalah-Masalah Hukum
issn 2086-2695
2527-4716
publishDate 2015-10-01
description The Existence of Supreme Court ruling that punishes dr. Bambang suprapto.Sp.M.Surg. using article 76 of law no 29 of 2004 on medical practices that had previously been cancelled by the Constitutional Court it self has proved that the Supreme Court has ruled constitutional the constitutional court's decision. This paper attempts to justify that by reason of any Constitutional Court still has binding force for the Supreme Court. It is based on four perspectives namely: 1. Historical perspective 2. Perspective protected object 3. Perspective functional 4. And normative perspectiv Adanya putusan Mahkamah Agung yang menghukum dr. Bambang Suprapto, Sp.M.Surg mengunakan Pasal 76 Undang-Undang Nomor 29 Tahun 2004 tentang Praktek Kedokteran yang sebelumnya telah dibatalkan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dengan sendirinya telah membuktikan bahwa Mahkamah Agung telah mengesampingkan putusan constitutional review Mahkamah Konstitusi. Tulisan ini mencoba untuk menjustifikasi bahwa dengan alasan apapun putusan constitutional review Mahkamah Konstitusi tetap mempunyai kekuatan mengikat bagi Mahkamah Agung. Hal ini didasarkan atas empat perspektif, yaitu : 1.perspektif historis, 2.perspektif objek yang dilindungi, 3.perspektif fungsional, dan 4.perspektif normatif
topic Binding Force, Constitutional Review, Constitutional Court, Supreme Court, Kekuatan Mengikat, Constitutional Review, Mahkamah Konstitusi, Mahkamah Agung
url https://ejournal.undip.ac.id/index.php/mmh/article/view/11469
work_keys_str_mv AT rianvanfritskapitan kekuatanmengikatputusanconstitutionalreviewmahkamahkonstitusiterhadapmahkamahagung
_version_ 1725832928805519360

Similar Items