https://consrev.mkri.id/index.php/const-rev/issue/feedConstitutional Review2024-03-14T10:44:32+07:00Rosmalinaconsrev@mkri.idOpen Journal Systems<table style="margin-top: 10px;" border="0"><tbody><tr><td valign="top"><a href="/index.php/const-rev/index" target="_self"><img src="/public/site/images/admin/cover_consrev.png" alt="" /></a><br /><a title="Scopus" href="https://www.scopus.com/sourceid/21101060915" target="_blank"><img style="margin-top: 12px;" src="/public/site/images/admin/scopus2.png" alt="" /></a></td><td> </td><td> </td><td valign="top"><div><strong>Constitutional Review</strong> is a law journal published by the Center for Research and Case Analysis and Library Management of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia twice a year. The primary purpose of this journal is to disseminate research, conceptual analysis and other writings of scientific nature on constitutional issues. Articles published cover various topics on constitutions, constitutional courts, constitutional court decisions and issues on constitutional law either in Indonesia or other countries all over the world. This journal is designed to be an international law journal and intended as a forum for a legal scholarship which discusses ideas and insights from law professors, legal scholars, judges and practitioners.</div><table class="homepage"><tbody><tr><td class="nowrap">Journal Title</td><td> : </td><td><strong>Constitutional Review</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="nowrap">ISSN</td><td> : </td><td><strong>ISSN <a href="https://portal.issn.org/resource/ISSN/2460-0016" target="_blank">2460-0016</a> (print) | e-ISSN <a href="https://portal.issn.org/resource/ISSN/2548-3870" target="_blank">2548-3870</a> (online)</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="nowrap">DOI Prefix</td><td> : </td><td><strong>Prefix 10.31078 by <img src="/public/site/images/admin/crrossref.png" alt="" /></strong></td></tr><tr><td class="nowrap">Editor in Chief</td><td> : </td><td><strong><a href="javascript:openRTWindow('https://consrev.mkri.id/index.php/const-rev/about/editorialTeamBio/92')">Pan Mohamad Faiz, S.H., M.C.L., Ph.D</a></strong></td></tr><tr><td class="nowrap">Publisher</td><td> : </td><td><a href="https://www.mkri.id/" target="_blank"><strong>Center for Research and Case Analysis and Library Management of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia</strong></a></td></tr><tr><td class="nowrap">Frequency</td><td> : </td><td><strong>2 issues per year (May and December)</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="nowrap">Indexed by</td><td> : </td><td><strong><a title="Scopus" href="https://www.scopus.com/sourceid/21101060915" target="_blank">Scopus</a> | <a href="https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/consrev7" target="_blank">HeinOnline</a> | <a href="https://tinyurl.com/cpxb7kvp" target="_blank">DOAJ</a>| <a title="Sinta " href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ep6uNz3lR-1dEI2flWfZZqiRLWK0YC0r/view?usp=sharing" target="_blank">Sinta</a>| <a href="https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?or_facet_source_title=jour.1329547" target="_blank">Dimensions</a></strong></td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table><p><strong>NEW TEMPLATE</strong></p><p>Constitutional Review will use a new template and a reference manager is an obligation in this template, such as Mendeley. Please use the Chicago Manual of Style 17th Edition (full note). The template can be downloaded <a href="/public/journals/2/Template%20for%20Author.doc" target="_blank">here</a>.</p><p><strong>All manuscripts must be submitted by Consrev's OJS system, <a href="/index.php/const-rev/user/register" target="_self">here</a>.</strong></p><p><strong>Important note:</strong></p><p>If English is not your first language, we appreciate it if your manuscript has passed the proofreading process by a native or a trusted proofreading institution. Do not forget to attach the proofread evidence to the supplementary file when making a submission. Otherwise, your manuscript will be delayed or even rejected after a preliminary review by the editorial team.</p><hr /><p> <a href="/index.php/const-rev/about/submissions#onlineSubmissions"><img src="/public/site/images/admin/1._Submit2_.png" alt="" /></a> <a href="/public/journals/2/Template%20for%20Author.doc"><img src="/public/site/images/admin/2._Manuscript2_.png" alt="" /></a> <a href="/index.php/const-rev/about/submissions#authorGuidelines"><img src="/public/site/images/admin/3._Author2_.png" alt="" /></a></p>https://consrev.mkri.id/index.php/const-rev/article/view/921The Turkish Constitutional Court During the State of Emergency Between 2016 and 20182024-02-12T14:48:08+07:00Engin Yıldırımengin.yildirim@anayasa.gov.tr<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>This article investigates the judicial approach of the Turkish Constitutional Court (TCC) during the </span><span>period of </span><span>state of emergency between 2016 and 2018 in Türkiye. Like its counterparts facing similar challenges, the TCC has endeavored to strike a balance between defeating grave threats to the constitutional system and defending fundamental rights in a time of public emergency. While constitutional courts should try to protect constitutional rights from executive abuse of emergency powers, they should do so without jeopardizing </span><span>the effectiveness of these measures in countering threats to the nation. During </span><span>the period of state of emergency, the TCC adopted a deferential stance in its constitutionality review cases arising from its textualist interpretation of the constitution, which explicitly prohibits the review of emergency decrees. However, the Court embraced a posture of rights protection in its individual applications procedure, which requires the TCC to follow case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).</span></p></div></div></div>2023-12-31T00:00:00+07:00Copyright (c) 2023 Constitutional Reviewhttps://consrev.mkri.id/index.php/const-rev/article/view/922Constitutional Court Decisions on the Judicial Independence of Other Indonesian Courts2024-03-14T10:44:32+07:00Simon Buttsimon.butt@sydney.edu.au<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>Judicial independence is a foundational principle of the Indonesian Constitution. It guarantees the independence of all Indonesian courts. However, most of the cases the Constitutional Court has handled relating to judicial independence have concerned the Constitutional Court’s own independence, focusing, for example, on issues of judicial tenure and terms. This paper examines the handful of Constitutional Court decisions about the judicial independence of other courts and judges in Indonesia – that is, non-constitutional courts and judges. It examines what the Constitutional Court has said about judicial independence in relation to these other courts. It then considers whether, by emphasising (perhaps overly) strict observance of judicial independence, these</span><span>Constitutional Court decisions compromise effective judicial accountability and </span><span>administration.</span></p></div></div></div>2023-12-31T18:47:16+07:00Copyright (c) 2023 Constitutional Reviewhttps://consrev.mkri.id/index.php/const-rev/article/view/923Court-Packing Accomplished – The Changing Jurisprudence of a Subordinate Constitutional Court2024-02-12T14:48:08+07:00Zoltán Szenteszente.zoltan@tk.hu<p>The worldwide decline in democracy poses a major challenge to the independence of constitutional courts, which are the guardians of constitutionalism and the rule of law. The international literature on constitutional adjudication is therefore understandably concerned with how judicial independence is undermined in different types of authoritarian regimes. However, less attention has been paid to how the practice of these courts evolves when they are directly or indirectly controlled by the government. This article examines how the practices of the Hungarian Constitutional Court changed following the successful court-packing by its government, which exercised its constitution-making parliamentary majority to subvert the Court, which was once one of the most activist constitutional courts in Europe. In this case, political influence was fullyexercised; this study shows how the Constitutional Court, in order to maintain a semblance of independence, uses several different methods to uphold the government’s will. The Hungarian example may be instructive as it illustrates where the dismantling of judicial independence can lead.</p>2023-12-31T18:47:16+07:00Copyright (c) 2023 Constitutional Reviewhttps://consrev.mkri.id/index.php/const-rev/article/view/924Ministerial Authority in Formulating Regulations Related to Presidential Lawmaking Doctrine2024-02-12T14:48:08+07:00Charles Simaburacharlessiambura@law.unand.ac.idSatya Arinantosatya.arinanto@ui.ac.idMaria Farida Indratimariafindrati@yahoo.comSaldi Israsaldiisra@law.unand.ac.idFitra Arsilfitra.arsil@ui.ac.id<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>As ministerial regulations increasingly play a larger role in government administration, they have become one of the main forms of legislation. This </span><span>has resulted in a significant increase in the quantity of ministerial regulations, </span><span>including those formed under the mandate of higher regulations, and those formed under the authority of ministers. According to the doctrine of making presidential laws, the president has a constitutional mandate to form implementing regulations for laws (delegated legislation). This normative research examines the basis for the formation of ministerial regulations in a presidential system. </span><span>It analyzes quantitative data by using samples from ministerial regulations </span>issued between 2005 and 2020 by 12 ministries. The analysis reveals that 65% of ministerial regulations come from ministerial authority (attribution), while 35% stem from higher regulatory directives. This has resulted in a proliferation of ministerial regulations in Indonesia. In the presidential system, the president holds the authority to formulate implementing regulations, with ministers acting as presidential aides and not lawmaking agents. Nevertheless, the unchecked formation of ministerial regulations on the basis of authority has contributed to a power imbalance, wherein ministerial regulations have gained ascendancy at the expense of presidential legislation products. This divergence from the Indonesian Constitution’s Article 4, Paragraph (1), and Article 5, Paragraph (2) dilutes the role of presidential legislation products as implementing regulations. It deviates from the established tenets of the presidential system in Indonesia, wherein the president is designated as the law executor rather than the minister.</p></div></div></div>2023-12-31T18:47:17+07:00Copyright (c) 2023 Constitutional Reviewhttps://consrev.mkri.id/index.php/const-rev/article/view/925The Role of The Indonesian Constitutional Court in Preventing Social Conflict in A Diverse Society2024-02-12T14:48:08+07:00Rosa Ristawatirosa@fh.unair.ac.idRadian Salmanradian.salman@fh.unair.ac.id<p>In the diverse society of Indonesia, the Constitutional Court plays a vital role in maintaining social harmony and preventing social conflict. Although this contribution is largely indirect, the Court exerts significant influence through its decisions. Since its establishment in 2003, the Court has rendered over 1,000 decisions, many of which carry profound implications for Indonesian society. This article addresses how the Constitutional Court, through its decisions, has contributed to mitigating social conflicts and fostering equilibrium within the nation’s diversity. To analyze this main issue, a normative approach grounded in the nation’s laws and the Constitutional Court’s decisions will be employed. Several decisions, especially on judicial reviews and election disputes, will be examined to illustrate the Court’s role in minimizing social conflict. From a social theory perspective, the study of social conflict has relevance in the context of law and society, given the potential for various types of conflicts in Indonesia’s diverse society. The legal basis for addressing social conflicts in Indonesia is the 2007 Law on Social Conflict Management. According to this law, social conflicts may arise from various factors, including political issues, economic disparities, socio-cultural differences, inter-religious or inter-ethnic tensions, disputes over boundaries at the village, regency/municipal, or provincial levels, conflicts related to natural resources, and disparities in the distribution of these resources within society. The Constitutional Court indirectly plays a role in preventing social conflicts. Nevertheless, the Court faces challenges in fulfilling this role. Pressures from various parties and interests may hinder its ability to ensure constitutional justice, potentially compromising its principles of independence and impartiality in fulfilling its mandate.</p>2023-12-31T18:47:17+07:00Copyright (c) 2023 Constitutional Reviewhttps://consrev.mkri.id/index.php/const-rev/article/view/926The Need for A Constitutional Complaint Mechanism for Tax Matters in Indonesia2024-02-12T14:48:08+07:00Adrianto Dwi Nugrohoadrianto.dwi@mail.ugm.ac.idMahaarum Kusuma Pertiwimahaarum.k@ugm.ac.idPraditya Janu Wisaksonopraditya.janu.wisaksono@mail.ugm.ac.id<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>Currently, there is no available mechanism for directly protecting taxpayers’ constitutional rights from potential violations resulting from tax regulations and policies in Indonesia. The Constitutional Court’s authority for constitutional review, the Supreme Court’s authority for judicial review, and the administrative appeal process before the State Administrative Court all fail to provide </span><span>sufficient protection for taxpayers’ constitutional rights. This article proposes </span><span>the introduction of a constitutional complaint mechanism for tax matters in Indonesia, as a mechanism to directly protect these rights. The constitutional complaint process ensures direct conformity between the reviewed regulation or policy and the Constitution, with an emphasis on the application of a proportionality test. This test serves as a valuable tool for assessing the balance between taxpayers’ constitutional rights and the government’s duty to collect taxes. Striking this balance is essential for advancing the exercise of political </span>accountability in taxation. This study employs a normative-empirical methodology, combining case law studies and theoretical perspectives to conceptualize the use of constitutional complaint against tax regulations and policies in Indonesia. The main finding of this research shows that the current constitutional review mechanisms put taxpayers at a disadvantage. Therefore, the authors conclude that the establishment of a constitutional complaint process will improve the protection of taxpayers’ rights.</p></div></div></div>2023-12-31T18:47:17+07:00Copyright (c) 2023 Constitutional Review