Reconceptualization of Testing Government Regultions in Place of Legislation in the Constitutional Court in the Perspective of Emergency Rule Law in Indonesia

Abstract

The Basic Law of 1945 provides for two matters of urgency, namely in Article 12 which gives authority to the President in establishing the circumstances of danger and Article 22 which is the constitutional basis for establishing Government Regulations in place of the Act by the President. The objective measure of issuing Perppu has been formulated by the Constitutional Court (MK) in Court Decision Number 138/PUU-VII/2009. This study aims to analyze the conceptual basis of constitutional testing of Perppu by the Consti-tutional Court, as well as the nature or content of the state emergency that gives rise to a coercive crunch. The research method used in this study is normative jurisprudence, that is, research that in its study with reference and bases on norms and legal norms, the principles of good legislation. This writing is intended to seek constitutional conceptuality of a fundamental nature in accordance with the principles of the estab-lishment of good legislation in establishing Perppu by the President and testing Perppu in the Constitutional Court. Perppu's charge material giving it a parallel status with the Act, certainly does not necessarily confer legitimacy for Perppu in testing in the Constitutional Court. The practice of statehood in terms of testing Perppu without changing the provisions of the NRI Constitution of 1945, needs to be reconceptualized so that the implementation of the concept of the state of law enshrined in the constitution can be realized.