Suchergebnisse

The validity of jurisprudence as one of the recognized legal sources in Indonesia has drawn broad attention and has emerged as an area for attention to conduct research. Indonesia heavily influenced by the civil law system basically does not commit to jurisprudence. However, if there are considerably contrary decisions with prior decisions, it becomes a debate about how the validity of existing jurisprudence. The Constitutional Court as one of the actors of judicial power has the authority to conduct judicial review of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. In line with such authority, the Constitutional Court is sometimes conflicted with a previous decision which has presented a landmark yet it is not followed. In other words, there is contrary between the previous and the present decisions. To investigate the matter, the present study focuses on how the jurisprudence applies to judicial review in the Constitutional Court decisions. The analytical method adopted literature study through a case study approach. The conclusion obtained in this line of research is that jurisprudence refers to source of legislation that can be a reference in deciding a case for judicial review yet it does not bind judges to deviate it based on logical reasons in accordance with the principles of the judicial independence and accountability and the living constitution.