Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Journal

Application of Jurisprudence to the Judicial Review Authority in Constitutional Court Decisions

Papua Law Journal · Vol. UME (2019) · pp. 1–13

DOI
10.31957/plj.v4i1.1042
ISSN
2540-9166, 2540-7716
Published
2019-12-01
Publisher
Faculty of Law Cenderawasih University
Language
eng

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Collaboration network of the authors

2 authors · 1 co-authorship link

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • Tarumanagara University
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

Metadata source: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://ejournal.uncen.ac.id/index.php/PLJ/oai, first harvested 1 Nov 2026, last seen 8 Nov 2026.
Original metadata (oai_dc) 
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en-US">Application of Jurisprudence to the Judicial Review Authority in Constitutional Court Decisions</dc:title>
	<dc:creator>Akasian, Erill Jonathan Samuel</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator>Kurniadi, Prycillya Agatha</dc:creator>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en-US">Testing laws</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en-US">Jurisprudence</dc:subject>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en-US">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.</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en-US">Faculty of Law Cenderawasih University</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2019-12-01</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:type xml:lang="en-US">Peer-reviewed Article</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://ejournal.uncen.ac.id/index.php/PLJ/article/view/1042</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.31957/plj.v4i1.1042</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en-US">Papua Law Journal; VOLUME 4 ISSUE 1, 2019; 1-13</dc:source>
	<dc:source xml:lang="id-ID">Papua Law Journal; VOLUME 4 ISSUE 1, 2019; 1-13</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2540-9166</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2540-7716</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://ejournal.uncen.ac.id/index.php/PLJ/article/view/1042/pdf</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en-US">Copyright (c) 2019 Papua Law Journal</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>