Indonesia idealized and aspired to by the founding fathers as a State law (Rechtsstaat / The Rule of Law). 1945 Constitution, Article 1, paragraph (3) asserts that "Indonesia is a State of Law". However, how the blueprints and design of country macro elaboration of the idea that law, has not been comprehensively formulated. There was only the development of sectoral areas of law. Therefore, the law should be conceived and developed as an integrated system. Moreover, the country was about to be understood as a legal concept, namely as the State Law. In law as a unified system are (1) institutional elements (institutional elements), (2) elements of the rule Siwak (instrumental element), and (3) elements of the behavior of legal subjects bearing rights and duties determined by the norms that rule (element subjective and cultural). The third element of the legal system that includes (a) the activities of law-making (law making), (b) execution or enforcement activities (administrating law), and (c) activities for violations of the law courts (adjudicating law). Usually, the last activity is also commonly referred to as a law enforcement activities in the strict sense (law enforcement) are in the field of crime involving the role of police, prosecutors, advocates, and in the field of civil justice or involve the role of an advocate (lawyer) and the judiciary. In addition, there are also other activities that are often overlooked, namely: (d) socialization and education of law (law socialization and education law) in the broadest sense that is also related to (e) the management of legal information (law information management) as an activity supporting. These five activities are usually divided into three areas of state power, namely (i) the functions of legislation and regulation, (ii) the executive and administrative functions, and (iii) the judiciary or judicial functions. Legislative organ is the institution of parliament, is the executive organ of government bureaucra
DEVELOPMENT OF LAW AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IN INDONESIA Indonesia idealized and aspired to by the founding fathers as a State law (Rechtsstaat / The Rule of Law). 1945 Constitution, Article 1, paragraph (3) asserts that "Indonesia is a State of Law". However, how the blueprints and design of country macro elaboration of the idea that law, has not been comprehensively formulated. There was only the development of sectoral areas of law. Therefore, the law should be conceived and developed as an integrated system. Moreover, the country was about to be understood as a legal concept, namely as the State Law. In law as a unified system are (1) institutional elements (institutional elements), (2) elements of the rule Siwak (instrumental element), and (3) elements of the behavior of legal subjects bearing rights and duties determined by the norms that rule (element subjective and cultural). The third element of the legal system that includes (a) the activities of law-making (law making), (b) execution or enforcement activities (administrating law), and (c) activities for violations of the law courts (adjudicating law). Usually, the last activity is also commonly referred to as a law enforcement activities in the strict sense (law enforcement) are in the field of crime involving the role of police, prosecutors, advocates, and in the field of civil justice or involve the role of an advocate (lawyer) and the judiciary. In addition, there are also other activities that are often overlooked, namely: (d) socialization and education of law (law socialization and education law) in the broadest sense that is also related to (e) the management of legal information (law information management) as an activity supporting. These five activities are usually divided into three areas of state power, namely (i) the functions of legislation and regulation, (ii) the executive and administrative functions, and (iii) the judiciary or judicial functions. Legislative organ is the institution of parliament, is the executive organ of government bureaucracy, while the judicial organ is the bureaucratic apparatus that includes police enforcement, prosecution and courts. All of it must also be connected with each hierarchy from highest to lowest organ, which is associated with the apparatus of the central, provincial officials, and officials at the district / city. In all the elements, components, and hierarchical aspects of the systemic and interrelated to each other's, which included understanding the legal system should be developed within the framework of State of Indonesia under the 1945 law. If the dynamics with respect to all aspects, elements, hierarchy and the device is not working in a balanced and synergistic, then the law as an integrated system also can not be expected to erect as they should. For example, because we inherited the tradition of Continental European law (civil law), we tend to shed so much attention on law-making activities (law making), but not as much attention to the activities of law enforcement (law enforcing). In fact, we too, just like that adheres to the paradigm and the doctrine of thinking prevalent in the civil law system, namely the enactment fiktie theory that assumes that once a set of legal norms, then at that time everyone thought out law. Ignorance of the law a person can not exonerate him from prosecution. This theory is also the justification given by the universally acknowledged principles, namely equality before the law (equality before the law). Rich people in Jakarta should be treated equally by law with the poor in remote areas of the Mentawai (West Sumatra), in the Baliem Valley (Papua), tribal stronghold on the border of Jambi, South Sumatra, or a remote tribe in the small islands throughout the archipelago. Fiktie above theory is fiktie utopian nature or course, because it does not reflect the actual reality. To the environment of developed countries like the Netherlands and especially small with the level of welfare and equitable knowledge society, is certainly no problem with that theory fiktie. In a homogeneous society like that of legal information available in the community are symmetrical. But in a country where such a large territory, so much does the number of inhabitants, as well as poor and underdeveloped welfare state and education as well as Indonesia, of course, the legal information system is available in the community are not symmetrical. It would be unfair to impose the rule of law applies to those things that did not understand, is not involved, and no reasonable knowledge of the norms that rule applied to him. If the norms that rule the process of criminalization, of course, the person threatens to become a criminal without his knowing it. Therefore, in addition to the presence and in the law-making activities (law making) and enforcement (law enforcing), required activities, the penal law (law socialization) that tend to be ignored and considered not important for this. In fact, this is the key rule of law. No social basis to realize the rights and obligations in law, then any law that is made will not be effective, will not be straight, and will not be adhered to in earnest. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of the law as an integrated system becomes very important to do. Development strategies or national development law to realize the idea of Rule of Law (Rechtsstaat or the Rule of Law) also should not be stuck just oriented to any law, or just to look at one element or aspect of the overall legal system of the above. That is why, I often put forward as a nation is important we develop and formulate what we mean by a conception of the State Law Indonesia mandated in the 1945 Constitution, especially now been confirmed in the formulation of the provisions of Article 1 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution. All agencies or institutions that have let the law be seen as part of the whole legal system needs to be developed within the framework of State Law. Therefore, Indonesia needs to devise a blueprint, a macro design of the State Law and the Legal System Indonesia we want to build and then set it in the future. A. ESTABLISHMENT AND LAW REFORM We've managed to make constitutional reform on a large scale. If the 1945 Constitution which includes only the provisions of 71 items in it, then after four changes, the 1945 Constitution now contains 199 items rule. The 1945 changes made gradually and became one of the agenda of the Annual Session of the Assembly from 1999 to the fourth change in the 2002 MPR Annual Session of the agreement along with the establishment of a Constitutional Commission tasked with doing a comprehensive assessment of the 1945 change by Legislative Act No.. I/MPR/2002 on the Establishment of the Constitutional Commission. The first change made in the MPR Annual Session of 1999, including Article 5, paragraph (1), Article 7, Article 9, Article 13 paragraph (2), Article 14, Article 15, Article 17 paragraph (2) and (3), Article 20 , and Article 22 of the 1945 Constitution. Under the provisions of the articles are amended, the First Amendment of the 1945 Constitution is to limit presidential powers and strengthen the position of the House of Representatives (DPR) as the legislature. The changes made in the annual session of the Assembly of 2000 which includes Article 18, Article 18A, Article 18B, Section 19, Article 20 paragraph (5), Article 20A, Article 22A, Section 22B, Chapter IXA, Section 28A, Article 28B, Section 28C , Chapter 28C, Section 28D, Section 28E, Article 28F, Chapter 28G, Section 28H, Article 28I, Article 28J, Chapter XII, Article 30, Chapter XV, Section 36A, Article 36B and Section 36C of the 1945 Constitution. Both of these changes include the problems of the country and the division of local government, first in terms of perfecting changes to strengthen the position of the House of Representatives, and the detailed provisions on human rights. Changes specified in the Third Annual Session of the Assembly of 2001 and the change or supplement the provisions of Article 1 paragraph (2) and (3), Article 3, paragraph (1), (3), and (4), Article 6 paragraph (1) and (2), Article 6A paragraph (1), (2), (3), and (5), Article 7A, Section 7B paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) , (6), and (7), Article 7C, Article 8, paragraph (1) and (2), Article 11 paragraph (2) and (3), Article 17 paragraph (4), Chapter VIIa, Article 22C Paragraph (1 ), (2), (3), and (4), Article 22D paragraph (1), (2), (3), and (4), Chapter VIIB, Article 22E Paragraph (1), (2), ( 3), (4), (5), and (6), Article 23 paragraph (1), (2), and (3), Article 23A, Section 23C, Chapter VIIIA, Article 23E paragraph (1), (2 ), and (3), Article 23F Paragraph (1), and (2), Article 23G Paragraph (1) and (2), Article 24 paragraph (1) and (2), paragraph 24A (1), (2 ), (3), (4), and (5), paragraph B of Article 24 (1), (2), (3), and (4), Article 24C paragraph (1), (2), (3) , (4), (5), and (6) of the 1945 Constitution. The material of the 1945 Constitution Third Amendment includes provisions on the basis principles state, state institutions and relations between state institutions, and the provisions on the General Election. The fourth change made in the MPR Annual Session of 2002. And changes or additions to the Fourth Amendment includes Article 2 paragraph (1), Article 6A paragraph (4), Article 8, paragraph (3), Article 11 paragraph (1), Article 16, Section 23B, Article 23D, Article 24 paragraph ( 3); Chapter XIII, Article 31 paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5), Article 32 paragraph (1), (2), (3), and (4); Chapter IV, Article 33 paragraph (4) and (5), Article 34 paragraph (1), (2), (3), and (4), Article 37 paragraph (1), (2), (3), ( 4), and (5), the Transitional Provisions of Article I, II, and III; Rules Additional Articles I and II of the 1945 Constitution. Material changes to the Fourth Amendment is a provision of the institutional relations between the state and state institutions, the abolition of the Supreme Advisory Council (DPA), the provision of education and culture, the provision of economic and social welfare, and the transition rules and additional rules. These changes not only editorial changes, but also involves a paradigm shift of thinking is very basic. Therefore, soon after the constitutional reform agenda (constitutional reform), we need to continue with the agenda of legal reform (establishment and renewal of the law) are also massive. If we look at the provisions of the 1945 Constitution was changed after four times, there are 22 grain provision stating "diantur with law" or "shall be further regulated by law", the provisions of item 11 which states "governed by law" or "shall be further dlaam law", and 6 eggs provision states "defined by law. Areas of law which requires the establishment and renewal can be grouped according to the required fields, namely: A. Politics and government. 2. Economics and business. 3. Field of social welfare and culture. 4. Structuring the field of legal systems and apparatus. As a consequence of the supremacy of the constitution and the hierarchy of legislation in a legal system, then change the constitution requires that amendments to legislation in the legal system, and the exercise by the authorities. Similarly, the 1945 changes are pretty basic and includes almost all of the provisions contained therein, to be followed by changes in legislation under it and its implementation by the competent organ. The provisions of legislation that has been sourced on certain provisions in the 1945 Constitution before the change to be seen again for compliance with the provisions of the 1945 changes. As a unified system of law, efforts to change legislation to conform with the 1945 changes should be an integral part of the overall development of national laws. Therefore, changes in the legislation should be well planned and participatory program of national legislation as well as the form of legislative review. National legislation program should be developed first and foremost is to implement the provisions of the 1945 Constitution. Under the provisions of the 1945 legislation can be elaborated to be made in the national legislation program in political, economic, and social. Besides, people can also apply for a constitutional review to the Constitutional Court against the Act which are considered detrimental to their constitutional rights in the 1945 Constitution as amended. Communities can also apply to the Supreme Court judicial review against the legislation under the Act are considered to be contrary to the laws and regulations is higher. Decisions Act test against the 1945 Constitution have been made by the Constitutional Court against a variety of proposed petition must also be considered in development of national laws, especially changes in legislation. In those rulings contain these terms and concepts related to the understanding of a provision in the constitution. Until now there have been various decisions of the Constitutional Court in political, economic, social and related provisions of the 1945 Constitution. The laws need to be prepared and updated not only in the form of the Act but also government regulation, Presidential Regulation, regulation, regulation in the high state institutions and specialized agencies and other independent like the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court, Bank Indonesia, the Commission General Election, and so forth. Similarly, in these areas, reform and legal establishment also takes the form of local regulation and later can also be the regulation of Governors, Regents Rules and Regulations mayor. To accommodate the needs at the local level, including accommodating the development of norms of customary law who live in rural communities, can also be formed Village Regulations. In addition, the nomenclature and form of its legal system also needs to be addressed, for example, necessary to distinguish clearly between rules (regels) which can be used as objects to the determination of judicial review of administrative decisions (beschikking) which can be used as the object state administrative courts, and the judge's decision (the verdict) and fatwa (legal opinion). B. Institutional Arrangement In addition to the changes and the addition of provisions grains, the 1945 changes also resulted in a change in position and ties some state institutions, the elimination of certain state institutions, and establishment of new state institutions. In any discussion of state institutions, there are 2 (two) constituents that are interrelated, ie organ and functie. Organ is a form or container, while functie is content; organ is the status of the form (English: form, Germany: vorm), whereas the movement of containers functie it suits the purpose of creation. In the text of the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945, the organs in question, there are mentioned explicitly by name, and some are mentioned explicitly only function. There is also a body or organ called that neither his name nor function or authority shall be governed by the regulation is lower. It can be argued that in fact called or named in the 1945 Constitution, there are more than 34 pieces of the organ, office, or institution. Organ, position, or the institutions referred to are: (I) the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) set forth in Chapter II; (Ii) the President of the Republic of Indonesia and (Iii) the Vice President set forth in Chapter III; (Iv) Council consideration of the president under Article 16 of the 1945 Constitution; (V) Ministry of State set out in Chapter V; (Vi) The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minister of the Interior, and Defense Minister jointly as triumpirat provided for in Article 8 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution; (Vii) The Minister of Home Affairs as tirumpirat provided for in Article 8 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution; (Viii) Ministry of Defence as triumpirat in Article 8 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution; (Ix) the Ambassador provided for in Article 13 paragraph (1), (2), and (3) of the 1945 Constitution; (X) Council provided for in Article 13 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution; (Xi) the Provincial Government set out in Chapter VI, which includes: (Xii) the Governor / Head of the provincial government; (Xiii) the Provincial Parliament (DPRD province); (Xiv) Government of the District include: (Xv) Regent / Head of Local government districts, and (Xvi) the House of Representatives District (local parliament); (Xvii) Regional Municipality; (Xviii) The Mayor / Head of Local Government, and (Xix) the City Council of Regional Representatives (DPRD); (Xx) House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia is set forth in Chapter VII of the 1945 Constitution; (Xxi) of the DPD set out in Chapter VIIa; (Xxii) the Commission by the organizers of election legislation called the National Election Commission (KPU) in Section VIIB and further regulated by law; (Xxiii) The central bank specified in Section VIII and shall be further regulated by law; (Xxiv) the State Audit Board (BPK) is set forth in Chapter VIIIA; (Xxv) The Supreme Court (Chapter XIV); (Xxvi) The Constitutional Court (Chapter XIV); (Xxvii) of the Judicial Commission (Chapter XIV); (Xxviii) the Indonesian military (TNI) (Chapter XII); (XXIX) of Police of the Republic of Indonesia (Chapter XII). (Xxx) Army (TNI AD) are provided for in Article 10 of the 1945 Constitution; (Xxxi) Navy (TNI AL) provided for in Article 10 of the 1945 Constitution; (Xxxii) Air Force (TNI AU) set out in Article 10 of the 1945 Constitution; (Xxxiii) Unit of local government which is special or privileged as provided in Article 18B paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution; (Xxxiv) Other bodies whose function is related to the judicial authority provided for in Article 24 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution. From at least the 34 institutes mentioned above, there is a substance of authority in the 1945 Constitution has not been determined, for example, the central bank. In Section 23D of the 1945 Constitution simply prescribed, "the State has a central bank that arrangement, position, authority, responsibility, and independence regulated by law". That is, what is the authority of the central bank itself will still be regulated by law. That is, the Constitution did not provide any authority to the central bank by law and by custom the history has been called the Bank Indonesia. 1945 Constitution only mentions the nature of the authority stated that the central bank is independent, although independence itself remains to be regulated by law. While the electoral commission, although his name has not been known with certainty, but its authority as the organizers have confirmed. In Article 22E Paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution specified that the "elections organized by the election commission of a national, permanent and independent". This means that the electoral commission that is organizing the elections, and as an organizer he was a national, permanent, and independent (independent). Therefore, both central bank and the organizers of the election commission can still be seen aspects of the constitutionality of the authority. If the operational implementation of the authority or the nature of that authority to deviate from the provisions of the Constitution, then such things can be the object of dispute in court. As far as the constitutionality of aspects of its authority, can not be no judicial forum is the Constitutional Court. Of the 34 organs or institutions mentioned above are in no way determined the rights or powers in the 1945 is (i) Ambassador (ii) Council, (iii) Army, (iv) Navy and ( v) the Air Force. Organs or institutions other than banks and the central election commission and the fifth last organ is generally called the firm name with the authority which is also clearly defined in the 1945 Constitution. Therefore, by taking into account the electoral commission and the organizers of the central bank, it can be said that the 1945 Constitution, there are 28 institutions or organs of state which has the constitutional authority or the authority granted by the 1945 Constitution. In addition, in Article 24 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution prescribed, "Other bodies that function is related to the judicial authority provided for in the law". Referred to other agencies in this paragraph include the Attorney General. Attorney General is not mentioned explicitly in the 1945, but its functions relating to the judicial authorities. Attorney General's Office regarding this case, further stipulated in the law or even by a separate law. However, its position in the unified court system and the democratic rule of law is clearly unconstitutional as important (constitutional importance) with the State Police who are specifically regulated in the provisions of Article 30 of the 1945 Constitution. That is, it is not arranged in the 1945 Attorney General's Office, compared with the regulation of police can not be used as an excuse to declare that the State Police is more important or higher than the Attorney General's constitutional position. Constitutionally, both are equally important in order to guarantee the rule of law and justice in the realization of the ideals of the efforts of law (rechtsstaat or the rule of law). Examples of the prosecutor as an institution covered by the words "other bodies" according to Article 24 paragraph (3) is also in line with the background of the formulation of the provisions of Article 24 paragraph (3) as described above. At first, the idea evolved to include the regulation of the prosecutor in the chapter on the 1945 Judicial Power. This idea is still listed in the 1945 Plan Amendment was left after the adoption of the 1945 Amendment in 2001. However, after the text of the Fourth Amendment was passed in 2002, the provisions of this prosecution does not have an agreement to be included explicitly in the article. Instead, came the formulation of Article 24 paragraph (3) mentioned above. Therefore, one of the bodies referred to in this paragraph is indeed the prosecution agency. However, because otherwise there other agencies, then opened the possibility of some other entity associated with the judicial authorities, in addition to the prosecutor. Thus, there is the possibility of the other bodies that more than one, so the total number of state agencies under the 1945 Constitution is also more than 34 pieces. For example, in addition to prosecution, other agencies that also deals with the functioning of judicial authorities is the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), the Advocate, the National Commission on Human Rights, and the officials who belong to the civil servants' understanding of the investigator (investigators), such officer customs, tax officials, officers of the Road Transport Traffic (DLLAJR), and even including the Navy that have a certain authority in the field of investigation in cases of criminal acts at sea. In other words, when coupled with the institutions or other bodies whose function is related to the judicial authorities referred to in Article 24 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, it is clear that the number of state agencies that are called explicitly and implicitly in the 1945 numbered more of 34 pieces. To-34 countries or more organ itself can also be divided into several groups. First, the state agency which may be cited as the State Agency (LTN), namely (i) The President and the Vice President as one institution, (ii) the House of Representatives, (iii) DPD (iv) the Assembly; (v) the Court; ( vi) MA and (vii) CPC. If the President and the Vice President as well as higher institutions of the country in terms of its officials, the number to eight, each of which is represented by (i) the President; (ii) Vice President, (iii) Chairman of the House; (iv) Chairman of the Council; (v) The Chairman of the Assembly; (vi) The Chairman of the Constitutional Court; (vii) Chief Justice, and (viii) Chairman of the CPC. Though now we no longer recognize the country's highest institution, but the title as a senior state institutions continue to be relevant to the seven state agencies associated with the above, represented by 8 eight job. The second, or more than 34 institutions are listed several state institutions whose authorities are directly given by the constitution, but it is not appropriate to be called a high state institutions. The reason is (i) its function is merely supporting or auxiliary to the main functions, such as the Judicial Commission is supporting to the judicial authorities. Actual task of this commission is internal in the neighborhood of judicial power, but so does effective oversight, ensured his position outside the independent and equal to the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, (ii) an explicit constitutional provision is only meant to assert an independent constitutional status, although it remains in the realm or domain of public affairs, such as the Indonesian National Army and National Police, (iii) determining the principal authority in the Constitution merely by implication, not explicitly defined (strict sense), such as the organizer of the election authority associated with the electoral commission. Even the election commission said even this is not specified by name in the 1945 Constitution, but only confirmed by law, or (iv) because of its institutional existence or authority not expressly specified in the constitution, but only called to be determined is set by law, such as the existence of a central bank under Section 23D of the 1945 will still be regulated by law. However, the constitution specified that the authority should be independent. That is, by implication the authority of the central bank is also set in the 1945 Constitution, though not the substance, but only the quality or nature. Thus, in addition to state agencies that are explicitly mentioned in the 1945 Constitution, there are state agencies that have the same constitutional importance to the state agencies named in the 1945 Constitution, although it was only regulated by or in law. Both are regulated in the Constitution or that are only regulated by or in law, provided that both have constitutional importance, can be categorized as a state institution that has a similar degree of constitutional, but can not be called a high state institutions. State institutions in this second category that meets the four criteria above are (i) The Judicial Commission, (ii) the Minister and the Ministry of State, (iii) the Minister Triumpirat; (iv) Council consideration of the president, (v) The central bank; (vi ) Indonesian National Army, (vii) The State Police, and (viii) Commission election organizers. In addition to the eight state agencies that are called explicitly or implicitly in the 1945 Constitution, there are state agencies that are created purely by statute, which can be categorized as an institution that has the constitutional importance as well. Institutions such as the mentioned example is (ix) the Attorney General; (x) Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), and (xi) National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM), and so forth. For example, the ombudsman has an important role in the framework of realization of the principles of good governance in the context of public services (public services). Ideals of the 1945 Constitution as a constitution of the welfare state or welfare state, which by Bung Hatta had translated the words of the state board, is also associated with a function such as ombudsman institutions can play an important role in the oversight and delivery of public complaints will the poor quality of public services (public services) by government bureaucracy. If the ombudsman institution is established by law, it is not likely a later time may also develop the interpretation that this agency will also be considered as an important institution in a constitutional manner. Especially with regard to the Judicial Commission, it can be said that his position is structurally equivalent to the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court. However, functionally, its role is supporting (auxiliary) to the institution of judicial power. Judicial Commission, although its function related to the judicial authorities, but did not perform the function of judicial power. The Judicial Commission is not the norm of law enforcement agencies (code of law), but the norm enforcement agencies conduct (code of ethics). Besides this commission only deal with matters of honor, dignity, and the behavior of judges, not by the judiciary or judicial authority is institutionally institutions. Keberadaannyapun actually comes from the law into their own internal environment, ie from the conception of the panel of judges that there is honor in the professional world of justice and the Supreme Court. That is, previously, this function is internal ethical auditors. However, to further ensure the effectiveness of the work in order to supervise the conduct of judges, then the function is drawn out into external auditor whose position is created equal with judges who are in institutions that are equal to the supervisor. It is true that the authority of the Judicial Commission, as well as the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, also set in the 1945 Constitution. Precisely, the Supreme Court under Article 24A, the Judicial Commission under Article 24B, while the Constitutional Court under Article 24C of the 1945 Constitution. However, the regulation concerning the authority of the institution in the Constitution is not something absolutely must be taken to mean that the institution is an institution that can be categorized as a high state institutions. The reason is that the Indonesian Army and the State Police authorities also set in the 1945 Constitution, namely in Article 30. However, the function of the army and police organizations actually belong to the category of the functions of government (executive), so the position can not be disederajatkan protokolernya with the President, Vice President, House of Representatives, Parliament, Constitutional Court, Supreme Court, and the CPC is only because the authorities are equally set in 1945 Constitution. Similarly, the Judicial Commission is also not comparable to other high state institutions simply because of its authority under Article 24B as well as soldiers and police authority set forth in Article 30 of the 1945 Constitution. Structurally, it can be said that the Judicial Commission is equal to the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court. However, because of the nature of the specific functions and are supporting (auxiliary), then the position protokolernya not need to be understood as an institution that is treated the same as the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court and Parliament, the Assembly of Representatives, and the CPC. Because, the Judicial Commission itself is not a state agency that runs the state power directly. The Judicial Commission is not judicial, executive, let alone the legislature. He only serves to support the establishment of the honor, dignity, and the behavior of judges as law enforcement officials and agencies that perform the function of judicial power (Judiciary). Thus, in performing its duties and authority, the Judicial Commission is also working alongside the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, not by the government or the people's representative institutions. In the work, the Judicial Commission, although it remains to be independent, to be closer to the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, not by government or by parliament. More specifically, the Judicial Commission should take a distance so as not to become a political tool of politicians, both executive and legislative positions, the government or the legislature to control and intervene in the independence of judicial power. Of the 34 or more state agencies that did not or have not specified the substance of authority in the 1945 is also the central bank. Regarding the central bank, Section 23D of the 1945 Constitution only specifies, "The state has a central bank that arrangement, position, authority, responsibility, and independence regulated by law". That is, what is the authority of the central bank itself will still be regulated by law. That is, the constitution did not provide any authority to the central bank by law and by custom has been referred to the history of Bank Indonesia. Specified in the 1945 just the nature of the central bank's authority, which is required to be independent. As such, it must be admitted, there remains the question of constitutionality related to the authority of the central bank, not the substance, but the nature of that constitutional authority. That is, the central bank could also face the issue of constitutionality of the authority which became the subject matter in the Constitutional Court. While the organizers of the election commission, even though his name has not been known with certainty, but its authority as the organizers have confirmed. In Article 22E Paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution specified that the "elections organized by the election commission of a national, permanent and independent". This means that the electoral commission that is organizing the elections, and as organizer of the elections he required a national, permanent, and independent (independent). Organs or agencies other than the central bank and the electoral commission is generally called the firm name to the authority are clearly defined in the 1945 Constitution. It can be said, from 34 state agencies that have been outlined above, there are 28 institutions whose authority is defined both in general and in detail in the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945. To-28 institutions are the ones who can be called as a state institution that has the constitutional authority or the authority granted explicitly by the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945. The country's 28 institutions are: (i) the People's Consultative Assembly, (ii) the President; (iii) Vice President, (iv) the Minister or the Ministry of State, (v) The Minister of Foreign Affairs as Minister Triumpirat, (vi) the Minister of the Interior as the Minister Triumpirat, (vii) as Defence Minister Minister Triumpirat, (viii) Council consideration of the President; (ix) the Provincial Government; (x) the Governor / Head of the provincial governments, (xi) the Provincial Parliament; (xii) Government City area, (xiii) The Mayor / Chief Local Government, (xiv) the City Council of the Regional Representatives; (xv) District Administration; (xvi) Regent / Head of local government district; (xvii) the House of Representatives District; (xviii ) Unit of local government which is special or privileged; (xix) House of Representatives; (xx) of the Regional Representative Council, (xxi) the election commission; (xxii) the Supreme Audit Board, (xxiii) the Supreme Court; (xxiv) the Constitutional Court; (xxv) of the Judicial Commission; (xxvi) of the Central Bank; (xxvii) the Indonesian National Army, and (xxviii) the Police of the Republic of Indonesia. While the five organs or other position, the authority did not or have not been mentioned in the 1945 Constitution, let alone either implicitly or explicitly. Fifth organ in question is (i) Ambassador (ii) Council, (iii) Army, (iv) Navy and (v) the Air Force. In the meantime, as described above, there are several other agencies including categories such as those referred to in Article 24 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution. Other bodies referred to can be termed as a state institution that also has constititonal constitutional importance or which are considered important but not mentioned explicitly in the 1945 Constitution. As a follow-up of constitutional reform, after the enactment of the 1945 Constitution, the Fourth Amendment constitutional structure of the Republic of Indonesia must be adapted to the design of the Constitution that has changed that. All institutions in the lining of the state and supra-governmental structures to be reorganized. Similarly, public institutions in the public sector (public infrastructure), such as political parties, civil society organizations and non-governmental organizations such as a foundation (Stichting) and associations (vereenigings), also need to be reorganized. In fact, organizations in the business sector or the market economy (market), such as a corporation, cooperative, and state / local enterprises also require realignment. In the state sector and the government, an effort that includes the institutional arrangements in the realm of legislative, executive, judicial, and even in areas with mixed or so-called independent agencies. Now, many institutions have sprung up independently, for example, the National Election Commission, National Commission on Human Rights, State Organizer Wealth Audit Commission, the Business Competition Supervisory Commission, Ombudsman Commission, the Broadcasting Commission of Indonesia, and so forth. All of these bodies need to be consolidated so it does not develop without a clear direction. In government, also needs to be re-organized the distinction between the political functions of administrative and technical, between organizational departments and non departmental government, and. Article 17 paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution, for example, determines that the establishment, alteration, and dissolution of the state ministry organizations should be regulated in the Act. That is, the Act also required that in it is set on various aspects relating to the state ministries, so that the President does not arbitrarily establish, modify, and disband the organization department. Institutional arrangement is not even related to the reform should be done as a result of an extensive regional autonomy held by Law no. 32 of 2004 on Local Government still needs to be sustained thought to be adjusted with the provisions of Article 18, Article 18A, Article 18B of the 1945 Constitution. Whole and of each institution, both in the structural layer of supra-state and government as well as in the infra structure of society, are expected to perform (i) reorganization, reorientation and retraining of human resources (personnel administration), (ii) streamlining and efficiency of the office structure , (iii) structuring of information systems and information technology-based public services, (iv) improvement of the infrastructure system of supervision and enforcement of the formation of a system of reward and punishment. C. LAW ENFORCEMENT Law Enforcement (law enforcement) in a broad sense includes activities to implement and apply the law as well as taking legal action against any violation of law or irregularities committed by the subject of law, either through a judicial procedure or through the procedures of arbitration and other dispute resolution mechanisms (alternative desputes or conflicts resolution). In fact, in a wider sense, including law enforcement activities are all activities that are intended to be legal Siwak as a device that regulates normative and binding on the subjects of law in all aspects of community life and the state really and truly adhered to run properly. In a narrow sense, it concerns the activities of law enforcement action against any violation or deviation from the regulations, in particular, are more narrowly, through a court proceeding involving the role of the police, prosecutor, advocate or attorney, and justice agencies. Therefore, in the strict sense, the main actors are very prominent role in law enforcement are police officers, prosecutors, lawyers and judges. The enforcement of this law can be seen first as a person or a human element to the quality, qualifications, and culture of each work. In that sense the problem of law enforcement depends on the actors, players, officials or law enforcement officers themselves. Second, law enforcement can also be seen as an institution, agency or organization with the quality of its own bureaucracy. In that regard we see from the eyes of law enforcement institutions in fact, has not been institutionalized in a rational and impersonal (institutionalized). However, both perspectives need to be comprehensively understood by looking at its links are to each other as well as its association with various factors and elements associated with the law itself as a rational system. The legal profession needs to be reorganized and improved the quality and welfare. Legal professionals, among others, include (i) legislators (politicians), (ii) the designer of law (legal drafter), (iii) legal counsel, (iv) advocate, (v) a notary public, (vi) the manufacturer's official land deed, ( vii) police, (viii) the prosecutor, (ix) clerks, (x) the judge, and (xi) the arbitrator or umpire. To improve the quality of professionalism of each profession, it needs a national system of certification and standardization, including with regard to their welfare system. In addition, it also needed an integrated education and training programs to continuously develop mental attitudes, improve knowledge and professional skills that law enforcement agencies. Professional quality development agenda among the legal profession need to be separated from administrative staff development programs in environmental law institutions, such as in court or in the people's representative institutions. Thus, the orientation of improving the quality of law enforcement agencies can really be focused and sustainable development. In addition, enhancement of quality of law enforcement professionals can also be done through increased empowerment of the respective professional organizations, such as the Judge Institute of Indonesia, Indonesian Notaries Association, and so forth. Thus, quality can be enhanced through the role of judges of the Supreme Court on the one hand and through the role of the Judge Institute of Indonesia on the other. In addition, law enforcement agenda also requires leadership at all levels who meet two conditions. First, leadership is expected to be an effective activator for the actions of law enforcement is certain; Second, leadership is expected to be a role model for the environment led each of the personal integrity of people who obey the rules. One important aspect in the context of law enforcement is the process of acculturation, socialization, and education law (law socialization and education law). Without the support of the awareness, knowledge and understanding of the subjects of law in society, a nonsense rule of law can be expected up and adhered to. Therefore, civilizing agenda, correctional and law education should be developed within the framework of realizing the idea of a separate state of law in the future. Several factors are associated with this question is (a) the development and management of information systems and legal infrastructure based information technology (information technology), (b) an increase in effort Publications, Communication and Socialization of Law; (c) development of legal education and training; and (d) correctional image and ideals-ideals in the legal field. In the framework of legal communication, needs to be rethought the needs of digital and electronic media, whether radio, television and internet networks and other media are owned and managed exclusively by the government. About television and radio can be said that private radio and television have been very much and therefore, the possibility of unilateral domination of government information flows such as occurred during the New Order is no longer possible to happen. Therefore, the source of the information from the public and investors are already available are many and varied. However, the flow of information from government to the community, particularly with regard to education and penal laws was considerably less. To that end, the construction of the special media has been very necessary. Such policies need to be considered include the possibility of strengthening the position of TVRI and RRI as a medium of education law as it was intended. D. POSITIVE CODE SYSTEM INFRASTRUCTURE To support the functioning of the legal system needed an ethical system that enforced a code of ethics in a positive way in the public sector. In every sector of state and government have always been disciplinary rules and guidelines for the organization and working procedures that are internal. Organizations within the community has always contained the Budget or Basic Guidelines and Guidelines for Household Budget or organization. Nevertheless, only few of the organization or the institutions that already have the Code of Ethics which is accompanied by the institutional infrastructure of the Honorary Board or the Ethics Committee in charge of enforcing the code of ethics meant. In addition, even if the guidelines or statutes and existing household, the documents that exist only on paper in the sense of not really be used as guidelines for organizational behavior. In general, regulatory documents, guidelines or statutes of the household and only be opened and read at the time of the congress, conferences or meetings of national organizations concerned. Moreover, these documents are just plain forgotten. In other words, the organizational culture or organizational culture in all walks of our society, the habit of obeying the rules, the rule of the game has not been a strong tradition. Tradition still have to obey the rules that are widely cultivated. This requires the institutionalization of the normative tradition of terraced, both with regard to legal norms, ethics and moral norms and legal norms. Therefore, in addition to re-organize and improve the system of legal norms, we also need to institutionalize ethics infrastructure systems and positive in our society. Ethical systems and infra structure is institutionalized, either through a mechanism within the supra-state structure and governance as well as in the infra structure of society. REFERENCES Asshiddiqie, Jimly. The idea of Sovereignty of the People in the Constitution and its implementation in Indonesia. New York: New Ichtiar-van Hoeve, 1994. _______________. "1945 Constitution: the Constitution of the State Welfare and Reality in the Future". Inauguration Speech Professor at the Faculty of Law University of Indonesia, Jakarta, 1998. ______________. Constitutions and Constitutionalism Indonesia. Revised edition. Jakarta: Constitutional Press, 2005. ______________. Constitutional Law and the Pillars of Democracy. Jakarta: Constitutional Press, 2005. ______________. Authority of the State Inter-Agency disputes. Jakarta: Constitutional Press, 2005. Kelsen, Hans. General Theory of Law and State. translated by: Anders Wedberg. New York: Russell & Russell, 1961. Montesquieu. The Spirit of the laws. Translated by Thomas Nugent. London: G. Bell & Sons, Ltd., 1914. Phillips, O. Hood and Paul Jackson. Constitutional And Administrative Law. Eighth Edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2001.
Pages to are hidden for
"DEVELOPMENT OF LAW AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IN INDONESIA"Please download to view full document