首页> 外文会议>International Conference on Law Reform >The Authority of Constitutional Court in General Election Results: Is It Powerful or Meaningless?
【24h】

The Authority of Constitutional Court in General Election Results: Is It Powerful or Meaningless?

机译:宪法法院在一般选举结果中的权威:它是强大还是毫无意义的?

获取原文

摘要

The third amendment to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia has raised the Constitutional Court as a constitutional justice institution in Indonesia. One of the authorities possessed by the Constitutional Court is to decide on disputes about the results of general elections. This article aims to examine the interpretation of the authority through a literature study method with a normative juridical approach. The results of this study explain that Article 24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia is the constitutional basis for the Constitutional Court in the authority to decide disputes about the results of general elections. On Normative perspective, it can be said that the authority possessed by the Constitutional Court is only in the case of disputes that occur between participants in general elections in the case of the results of general elections authorized by the General Election Commission. When interpreted with a comprehensive approach, the Constitutional Court as the guardian of the constitution and the guardian of democracy, the authority to decide disputes on the results of the general election cannot be interpreted only speaks of disputes over results but the Constitutional Court can examine the electoral process if fraud occurs structured, systematic and massive. So, the Constitutional Court is not only a Court Calculator that only calculates the results of general elections, but more than that as the guardian of the constitution and democracy in Indonesia.
机译:印度尼西亚共和国1945年宪法的第三修正案提出了宪法法院作为印度尼西亚的宪法司法机构。宪法法院拥有的当局之一是决定大选结果的争议。本文旨在通过具有规范性法律方法的文献研究方法来审查权力的解释。本研究的结果说明了印度尼西亚共和国1945年宪法第24C款(1)条是宪法法院在决定大选结果争议的宪法基础。关于规范性观点,可以说宪法法院所拥有的权力只是在大选委员会授权的大选结果中参与者之间发生的争议。当以全面的方法解释为宪法法院作为宪法的监护人和民主的监护人,决定争议的权力是一般选举的争议,不能被解释只讲述结果争议,但宪法法院可以审查如果欺诈发生结构,系统和巨大的欺诈,则选举过程。因此,宪法法院不仅是法院计算器,只能计算大选结果,但不仅仅是印度尼西亚宪法和民主的监护人。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号