Disharmoni Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dan Mahkamah Agung Bagi Calon Anggota DPD RI

Abstract

Legal inconsistency arises from the disparities between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court's interpretations over what qualifies a candidate for admission in the DPD RI who isn't even a political party administrator. The pros and cons of the Constitutional Court's and the Supreme Court's decisions are flaws in the obligations and functions of governmental institutions and stimulate legal debate. An analytical approach to judicial power based on decisions made by judges of the Constitutional Court and Supreme Court in accordance with the Law on Justice is the approach applied in this study. According to the study's findings, the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court, which are state institutions that issue legal judgments on laws and regulations, are responsible for the dualism of decisions that sometimes occurs in a single case. In order to obtain harmonious relationship for the purpose of justice and legal certainty for the people of the future, the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court might investigate the presence of this polarity.