Kedudukan dan Kekuatan Hukum Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung (Sema) Dalam Hukum Positif Indonesia

Raihan Andhika Santoso; Elan Jaelani; Utang Rosidin

doi:10.59581/deposisi.v1i4.1392

Authors

Raihan Andhika Santoso UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung
Elan Jaelani UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung
Utang Rosidin UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59581/deposisi.v1i4.1392

Keywords:

Law, SEMA, Act, Supreme Court

Abstract

The legal products of the Supreme Court are not the same as laws. If the law does not understand or regulate something, the Supreme Court can issue policy regulations based on its authority. However, such a thing is not always done. For example, in 1963 the Supreme Court issued Circular Letter Number 3, which effectively canceled a number of Articles in the BW because it was considered unfair. . Researchers use normative research methods to obtain relevant material and explanations for the formulation of the problem as well as to obtain research-based understanding and explanations raised. Normative research is a type of research conducted through a review of literature (secondary sources). The type of normative research chosen is normative juridical, because the starting point of this research is to use legal norms or existing laws and regulations to analyze the problem under study. The results show that the Position and Strength of the Supreme Court Circular Letter (SEMA) in the legal system in Indonesia is recognized outside the hierarchy of laws and regulations and has binding legal force in accordance with the words of Article 8 Paragraph (1) and (2) of Law no. 12 of 2011

References

Cahyadi, I. A. (2014). Kedudukan Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung (SEMA) dalam Hukum Positif di Indonesia. Universitas Brawijaya Malang.

Fungsi Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Dalam Mengisi Kekurangan atau Kekosongan Hukum Acara. (n.d.). PTA Yogyakarta. https://www.pta-yogyakarta.go.id/artikel-mainmenu-144/artikel-hukum-mainmenu-145/720-fungsi-peraturan-mahkamah-agung-dalam-mengisi-kekurangan-atau-kekosongan-hukum-acara.html%0A

Hotman P. Sibuea. (2010). Asas Negara Hukum, Peraturan Kebijakan. Erlangga.

Icha Satriani. (2015). KEDUDUKAN SURAT EDARAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG. UNIVERSITAS HASANUDDIN MAKASSAR.

M. Yahya Harahap. (2009). Kekuasaan Mahkamah Agung, Pemeriksaan Kasasi dan Peninjauan Kembali Perkara Perdata. Sinar Grafika.

Nursyamsi Usman. (2017). EKSISTENSI SURAT EDARAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 7 TAHUN 2014 DALAM PROSES PENINJAUAN KEMBALI. Universitas Hasanuddin Makassar.

Philipus M. Hadjon. (2002). Pengantar Hukum Administrasi Indonesia. Gadjah Mada University Press.

Prasetya, V. D. (2020). KEDUDUKAN SURAT EDARAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 12 TAHUN 2011 TENTANG PEMBENTUKAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN. JOM Fakultas Hukum Universitas Riau Volume VII No I Januari-Juni 2020, VII, 11–12.

Saputra, A. (2015). Begini Kedudukan SE Hate Speech dalam Tata Urutan Peraturan RI. DetikNews. https://news.detik.com/berita/d-3059328/begini-kedudukan-se-hate-speech-dalam-tata-urutan-peraturan-ri

Susi Dwi Harijanti. (2011). Negara Hukum Yang Berkeadilan. usat Studi Kebijakan Negara FH UNPAD.

Victor Imanuel W. Nalle. (n.d.). Kewenangan Yudikatif Dalam Pengujian Peraturan kebijakan kajian putusan Mahkamah Agung No.23/P/HUM/2009. Yudisial, 6, 41–42.