Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Terhadap Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja Dalam Perspektif Filsafat Utilitarianisme

I Gede Agus Kurniawan

Abstract


 

This legal research aims to examine the existence of Constitutional Court Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 from utilitarian philosophy while paying attention to the concept of utilitarianism in Constitutional Court Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020. The urgency of this research stems from the controversy over the birth of the Job Creation Law which continues after the Constitutional Court Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020. The 'conditionally unconstitutional' decision on the Job Creation Law provides intellectual property from legal scholars; Remember, several points of view examine the problem. This legal research uses an approach and approaches to laws and regulations based on primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and non-legal materials. The study results stated that the decision of the Constitutional Court no. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 has the spirit of the utilitarian philosophy, which aims to maintain the proportionality aspect and provide guarantees for implementing the Implementing Regulations of the Job Creation Law. On the other hand, the spirit of utilitarianism in the Constitutional Court Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 explains social issues by transforming a legal instrument of sequence from the issuance of the Job Creation Law.

Penelitian hukum ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji keberadaan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 dalam perspektif filsafat utilitarianisme; sekaligus menelaah berkenaan dengan implikasi dari adanya konsepsi utilitarianisme dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020. Urgensi penelitian ini bermula dari Kontroversi lahirnya UU Cipta Kerja terus berlanjut pasca hadirnya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020. Putusan ‘inkonstitusional bersyarat’ terhadap UU Cipta Kerja nyatanya memberikan perdebatan intelektual dari kalangan para sarjana hukum; mengingat, terdapat beberapa perspektif yang mengkaji persoalan tersebut. Penelitian hukum ini menggunakan pendekatan konseptual dan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan dengan didasarkan atas bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder, dan bahan non-hukum. Hasil penelitian menyatakan bahwa putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 memiliki semangat filsafat utilitarianisme sebagaimana bertujuan guna menjaga aspek proporsionalitas serta memberikan jaminan terhadap terselenggaranya Peraturan Pelaksana dari UU Cipta kerja. Di sisi lain, implikasi semangat utilitarianisme dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 yaitu memberikan jaminan ketertiban sosial berkenaan dengan transformasi suatu instrumen hukum sebagaimana persekuensi dari terbitnya UU Cipta kerja.

 


Keywords


JKeywords: Conditionally Unconstitutional; Utilitarianism; Philosophy of Law

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alistar (Hîrlav), Emima. “The Relation Between Law and Morality.” In Research Association For Interdisciplinary Studies, 2–4, 2019. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3388103.

Anggono, Bayu Dwi. “Peluang Adopsi Dan Tantangannya Dalam Sistem Perundang-Undangan Indonesia.” RechtsVinding 9, no. 1 (2020): 17–37.

Anggono, Bayu Dwi, and Fahmi Ramadhan Firdaus. “Omnibus Law in Indonesia: A Comparison to the United States and Ireland.” Lentera Hukum 7, no. 3 (November 2020): 319–36. https://doi.org/10.19184/ejlh.v7i3.19895.

Aryani, Christina. “Reformulasi Sistem Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Melalui Penerapan Omnibus Law.” Jurnal USM Law Review 4, no. 1 (2021): 27. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v4i1.3194.

Bell, Melina. “John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle and Free Speech: Expanding the Notion of Harm.” Utilitas 1, no. 1 (2020): 1–18.

Budiono, Arief. “Teori Utilitarianisme Dan Perlindungan Hukum Lahan Pertanian Dari Alih Fungsi.” Jurnal Jurisprudence 9, no. 1 (September 2019): 102–16. https://doi.org/10.23917/jurisprudence.v9i1.8294.

Busroh, Firman Freaddy. “Konseptualisasi Omnibus Law Dalam Menyelesaikan Permasalahan Regulasi Pertanahan.” Arena Hukum 10, no. 2 (2017): 227–50. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.arenahukum.2017.01002.4.

Disantara, Fradhana Putra. “Pancasila Juga Volksgeist, Tanya Kenapa?” In Filsafat Hukum Pancasila (Suatu Kajian Filsafat, Hukum, Dan Politik), edited by Fradhana Putra Disantara Irfa Ronaboyd, 1st ed., 63–68. Jakarta: Kreasi Cendekia Pustaka, 2020.

———. “Perspektif Keadilan Bermartabat Dalam Paradoks Etika Dan Hukum.” Jurnal Litigasi (e-Journal) 22, no. 2 (2021): 205–29. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v22i2.4211.

Dodek, Adam M. “Omnibus Bills: Constitutional Constraints and Legislative Liberations.” Ottawa Law Review 48, no. 1 (2017): 42.

Fios, Frederikus. “Keadilan Hukum Jeremy Bentham Dan Relevansinya Bagi Praktik Hukum Kontemporer.” Humaniora 3, no. 1 (April 2012): 299. https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v3i1.3315.

Fletcher, George P. “Fairness and Utility in Tort Theory.” Harvard Law Review 85, no. 3 (January 1972): 537–73. https://doi.org/10.2307/1339623.

Gray, John. “Two Faces of On Liberty: Liberal Institutions Are Becoming More Censorial. Is the Philosopher John Stuart Mill to Blame?” Sage Publishing 49, no. 4 (2020): 66–69.

Hananto Widodo, Dicky Eko Prasetio. “Penataan Kewenangan KPU Dan Bawaslu Dalam Melakukan Pengawasan Dan Menangani Sengketa Proses Pemilu.” Perspektif Hukum 21, no. 2 (2021): 17–38.

Hendra Sukarman, Wildan Sany Prasetiya. “Degradasi Keadilan Agraria Dalam Omnibus-Law.” Jurnal Ilmiah Galuh Justisi 9, no. 1 (2021): 17–37.

Hill, John Lawrence. The Prophet of Modern Constitutional Liberalism: John Stuart Mill. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020.

Kristianti, Dewi Sukma. “Prinsip Kebersamaan Dalam Hukum Investasi Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 Tentang Cipta Kerja: Politik Hukum Kepentingan Investasi Ataukah Kesejahteraan Masyarakat.” PAMALI: Pattimura Magister Law Review 1, no. 2 (October 2021): 90–113. https://doi.org/10.47268/pamali.v1i2.619.

Lathif, Nazaruddin. “Teori Hukum Sebagai Sarana/ Alat Untuk Memperbaharui Atau Merekayasa Masyarakat.” Pakuan Law Review 3 Nomor 1 (2017): 74.

Latipulhayat, Atip. “Jeremy Bentham.” Padjadjaran Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) 2, no. 2 (2015): 413–24. https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v2n2.a12.

Prasetyo, Teguh. Pembaharuan Hukum: Perspektif Teori Keadilan Bermartabat. Malang: Setara Press, 2017.

Rahmatullah, Indra. “Filsafat Hukum Utilitarianisme: Konsep Dan Aktualisasinya Dalam Hukum Di Indonesia.” Adalah: Buletin Hukum & Keadilan 5, no. 2 (2021): 19–32. https://doi.org/10.15408/adalah.v5i2.22026.

Rato, Dominikus. “Realisme Hukum: Peradilan Adat Dalam Perspektif Keadilan Sosial.” Jurnal Kajian Pembaruan Hukum 1, no. 2 (July 2021): 285. https://doi.org/10.19184/jkph.v1i2.24998.

Redi, Ahmad, and Ibnu Sina Chandranegara. Omnibus Law: Diskursus Pengadopsiannya Ke Dalam Sistem Perundang- Undangan Nasional. 1st ed. Depok: Rajawali Pers, 2020.

Resnik, Judith. “The Democracy in Courts: Jeremy Bentham, ‘Publicity’, and the Privatization of Process in the Twenty-First Century.” NoFo 10, no. 1 (2013): 77–119.

Santoso, Hari Agus. “Efektifitas Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja Terhadap Peningkatan Investasi.” Jurnal Hukum Positum 6, no. 2 (2021): 254–72.

Satria. “Implikasi Putusan MK Terhadap Substansi Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja.” ugm.ac.id, 2021.

Satriawan, Iwan. “Pro-Kontra Putusan MK.” Yogyakarta: Pusat Kajian Konstitusi dan Pemerintahan Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, 2021.

Sujendro, Edy. “Gagasan Pengaturan Kodifikasi Dan Unifikasi Peraturan Perubahan Dan Peraturan Omnibus Law.” Jurnal USM Law Review 3, no. 2 (2020): 385. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v3i2.2727.

Sumodiningrat, Aprilian. “Meninjau Ulang Ketentuan Presidential Threshold Dalam Pemilihan Presiden Dan Wakil Presiden Di Indonesia.” Jurnal Kajian Pembaruan Hukum 1, no. 1 (2021): 49–74. https://doi.org/10.19184/jkph.v1i1.23349.

Suntoro, Agus. “Implementasi Pencapaian Secara Progresif Dalam Omnibus Law Cipta Kerja.” Jurnal HAM 12, no. 1 (April 2021): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.30641/ham.2021.12.1-18.

Suriadinata, Vincent. “Penyusunan Undang-Undang Di Bidang Investasi: Kajian Pembentukan Omnibus Law Di Indonesia.” Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 4, no. 1 (2019): 115–32. https://doi.org/10.24246/jrh.2019.v4.i1.p115-132.

Suryati, Ramanata Disurya, and Layang Sardana. “Tinjauan Hukum Terhadap Omnibus Law Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja.” Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Hukum Simbur Cahaya 28, no. 1 (2021): 97–111. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.28946/sc.v28i2.902.

Susanti, Dyah Octorina, and A’an Efendi. Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2015.

Tarantino, Piero. Philosophy, Obligation and the Law: Bentham’s Ontology of Law. 1st ed. New York: Routledge, 2018.

Wexler, S. “The Moral Confusions in Positivism, Utilitarianism and Liberalism.” The American Journal of Jurisprudence 30, no. 1 (January 1985): 121–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajj/30.1.121.

Widodo, Hananto, and Fradhana Putra Disantara. “Problematik Kepastian Hukum Darurat Kesehatan Masyarakat Pada Masa Pandemi COVID-19.” Jurnal Suara Hukum 3, no. 1 (March 2021): 197. https://doi.org/10.26740/jsh.v3n1.p197-226.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26623/julr.v5i1.4941

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2022 JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Jurnal USM LAW REVIEW : Journal Law by Department of Pascasarjana, Magister Hukum Universitas Semarang is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.