Interpretation of Constitution in Indonesia: Orisinalism, Non-Orisinalism, or Explicism
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/crcwg522Keywords:
Orisinalism, Non-Orisinalism, ExplicismAbstract
In Indonesia, the originalism and non-originalism approaches in interpreting the constitution are used by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia without having to be distinguished. This can be justified both theoretically, practically, and juridically in Indonesia. It's just that the use of such a mixed approach contains its own strengths and weaknesses. This article explains and analyzes the use of various methods of interpreting the constitution, especially in the practice of constitutional justice in Indonesia. Then explain and put forward the idea of developing a method of interpreting the constitution that is unique to Indonesia. In the end, this article recommends that the interpretation of eclecticism as applied by the Indonesian constitutional court is worthy of continuing development. Nevertheless, its use should be carried out holistically, integratively, and dynamically, linking it with the ideology of Pancasila as the basis of the Indonesian state
Downloads
References
1. Albert H.Y. Chen, “The Interpretation of the Basic Law--Common Law and Mainland Chinese
Perspectives,” Hong Kong Journal Ltd., (Maret 2000), hlm.1.
2. Andrei Marmor, Interpretation and Legal Theory, Second Edition (Oregon : Oxford and Portland, 2005).
hlm. 167.
3. A. Barber and James E. Fleming, Constitutional Interpretation: The Basic Questions, (Madison AvenueNew York: Oxford University Press, 2007), hlm. 190.
4. Aharon Barak, Purposive Interpretation In Law, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005), hlm. 85.
5. Ariel L. Bendor dan Zeev Segal, “The Judicial Discretion of Justice Aharon Barak”, Tulsa Law Review,
Vol. 47, 2011, hlm. 469.
6. Aharon Barak, Purposive Interpretation In Law, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005), hlm. 89-
92.
7. Ariel L. Bendor dan Zeev Segal, loc.cit., hlm. 466.
8. Aharon Barak, “Hermeneutics and Constitutional Interpretation”, Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 14, 1993,
hlm. 770.
9. Craig R. Ducat, Constitutional Interpretation, (California: Wordsworth Classic, 2004), hlm. xiii.
10. Charles Sampford, Interpreting Constitutions Theories, Principles and Institutions, (Sydney: The
Ferderation Press, 1996), hlm.56;
11. Gregory E. Maggsa, “A Concise Guide to The Federalist Papers as A Source of The Original Meaning of
The United States Constitution”, Boston University Law Review, 87 (Oktober 2007), hlm. 805-806.
12. Hristo D. Dimitrov, “Interpretive jurisdiction The Constitutional Court's Interpretive Jurisdiction: The
Advantages of an Authoritative, Non-adversarial and Prospective Process of Constitutional
Interpretation”, Columbia Journal of Transnational Law Association, Inc. (1999), hlm. 7.
13. Herbert N. Krapa, “Making Law a New: The Resonating Echoes of Purposive Interpretation in The
Ethos of Ghanaian Jurisprudence,” Ghana School of Law Students’ Journal, Vol. 4, 2016, hlm. 34.
14. Jed Rubenfeld, “Legitimacy and Interpretation,” dalam Larry Alexander (Edt.), Constitusionalism:
Philosophical Foundations, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), hlm. 197.
15. Jeffrey Goldsworthy, “Constitutional Interpretation: Originalism,” Philosophy Compass, 4 (2009), hlm.
684.
16. Jeffrey Goldsworthy, loc. cit., hlm. 684-686.
17. Jeffrey Goldsworthy, “The Case for Originalism”, dalam Grant Huscroft & Bradley W. Miller (Ed.), The
Challenge of Originalism: Theories of Constitutional Interpretation, (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2011), hlm. 42.
18. Jeffrey Goldsworthy, Interpreting Constitutions: A Comparative Study, (New York: Oxford University
Press, 2006), hlm. 170.
19. John H. Garvey, Thomas Alexander Aleinikoff, & Daniel A. Farber, Modern Constitutional Theory: A
Reader, (West: Thomson: 2004), hlm. 12.
20. Justin Collings, “Ernst-Wolfgang Bӧckenfӧrde on Constitutional Judging in a Democracy”, German Law
Journal, Vol. 19, No. 02, 2018, hlm. 166.
21. Mauro Cappalleti, The Judicial Process in Comparative Perspective, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989),
hlm. 156.
22. Philip Bobbitt, Constitutional Fate: Theory of the Constitution, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982),
hlm.42
23. Philip C. Kissam, “Constitutional Theory and Ideological Factors: Three Nineteenth-Century Justices”,
Kansas Law Review, (2006), hlm. 754-758.
24. Philip Bobbitt, Constitutional Fate: Theory of the Constitution, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982),
hlm.8.
25. Philip Bobbitt, Robert Post, Richard Fallon, Cass Sunstein, Daniel Farber, Stephen M. Griffin,
“Pluralism in Constitutional Interpretation,” Texas Law Review, 72, (1994), hlm. 1754 Ibid.
26. Peter J. Smith, “How Different are Originalism and Non-Originalism?”, Hasting Law Journal, 62 (2011),
hlm. 735.
27. Randy E. Barnett, “An Originalism for Non-Originalists,” Loyola Law Review, 45 (1999), hlm. 611.
28. Richard H. Fallon, Jr., “How to Choose a Constitutional Theory,” California Law Review, 87, hlm. 541.
29. Russell Pannier, “Essay: Abraham’s Theory of Constitutional Interpretation”, William Mitchell Law
Review, (2002), hlm. 283.
30. Ronald Kahn, “Book Review : Purposive Interpretation In Law”, Department of Politics, Oberlin College
Journal, Vol. 16, No. 9, September 2006, hlm. 717.
31. Róbert R. Spanó, “Some Theoretical Reflections on Statutory Interpretation With an Emphasis on
Purposive Interpretation in Law and Its Limits”, Seminar Paper, Bergen, (2010), hlm. 7.
32. Róbert R. Spanó, The Interpretation of Statutes, (Reykjavík: Codex, 2007), hlm. 42-45.
33. Stephen M. Feldman, op.cit., hlm. 290, Philip Bobbitt, op.cit., hlm. 8,
34. Stephen M. Feldman, “Constitutional Interpretation and History: New Originalism Or Eclecticism?”,
BYU Journal of Public Law, 28 (2014), hlm. 341.
35. Stephen M. Feldman, “Constitutional Interpretation and History: New Originalism or Eclecticism?”,
BYU Journal of Public Law, 28 (2014), hlm. 341.
36. Thomas B. Colby and Peter J. Smith, “Living Originalism”, Duke Law Journal, 59 (November 2009),
hlm.249.
37. Ihedioha, Thelma Ebele, Rita Ifeoma Odo, Uwakwe Simon Onoja, Chikaodili Adaobi Nwagu, John
Ikechukwu Ihedioha, and . "Hepatoprotective properties of methanol leaf extract of Pterocarpus
mildbraedii Harms on carbon tetrachloride-induced hepatotoxicity in albino rats (Rattus
norvegicus)." Journal of Complementary Medicine Research 10 (2019), 162-
169. doi:10.5455/jcmr.20190716093120
38. Wang, J.-H., Zhou, P., Li, Y.-Q., Sun, J.-J., Tan, W.-J., Huang, C.-C., Yu, X.-Y., Liu, C.-Z., Luo, H.-
L. Modification of atrioventricular node in a special condition treating paroxysmal supraventricular
tachycardia (2010) Journal of Cardiovascular Disease Research, 1 (4), pp. 210-212. DOI: 10.4103/0975-
3583.74266.
39. Kaplan, S., Odaci, E., Canan, S., Önger, M.E., Aslan, H., Ünal, B. The disector counting technique (2012)
NeuroQuantology, 10(1), pp. 44-53.
40. Beck, F. Synaptic quantum tunneling in brain activity (2008) NeuroQuantology, 6 (2), pp. 140-151.
41. Kumar, D.K., Nagar, S.K., Tiwari, J.P.A new algorithm for model order reduction of interval systems
(2013) Bonfring International Journal of Data Mining, 3 (1), pp. 6-11.
42. Devasena, C.L., Sumathi, T., Gomathi, V.V., Hemalatha, M. Effectiveness evaluation of rule-based
classifiers for the classification of iris data set (2011) Bonfring International Journal of Man Machine
Interface, 1, pp. 05-09.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 AUTHOR
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
