Academic literature on the topic 'Executive orders Indonesia'

Abstract Indonesia is a country that is limited by the constitution, in accordance with the provisions of Article 1 paragraph (2) and (3) of the 1945 Constitution. What is carried out by the executive, legislative, and judicial institutions with different roles, functions and tasks that do not intervene with each other, but are interconnected and intersecting. For example, the DPR Questionnaire Rights to the KPK raises pros and cons, because there are those who think that the KPK cannot be submitted to a questionnaire, but there are those who think that the KPK can also be asked for a questionnaire by the DPR. Questionnaire rights are one of the rights owned by the DPR in carrying out the supervisory function by conducting an investigation of the implementation of a law and/or government policy relating to important, strategic, and broad impacts on the life of the community, nation and state that are allegedly contradictory with the law. KPK is a state institution formed based on the Law so that it is an Organ of Law, but that does not mean that the state institution has no legal or unconstitutional position. KPK is not explicitly mentioned in the 1945 Constitution, but both have constitutional importance in the constitutional system, and even the Constitutional Court states that the term state institution is not always mentioned in the 1945 Constitution, but also formed on the basis of orders from regulations under the constitution. Thus the existence of the KPK as an institution tasked with eradicating corruption is not outside the constitutional system, but instead is placed constitutionally and acknowledged its existence in the constitutional system as one of the state institutions. Keywords: DPR, Hak Angket, KPK

This essay explores the relationship between animal sacrifice, the production of human subjectivity, and expressions of power, using a newspaper photograph of a goat being thrown into a famous mud volcano in Indonesia as a point of departure. This devastating mud volcano, widely known as the “Lapindo” mudflow, began in 2006 and continues to release mud in 2012. I also use this disaster as a case study to observe the ways violence against nonhumans helps sustain individuals and communities within certain social and ecological orders, both in Western and Indonesian contexts. As this project traces the various ways sacrificial violence expresses subjectivity, it will consider the staging of unequal power relations in both the execution and the representation of the sacrifice ritual. By recognizing these manifestations of power, we – who have the cognitive faculties, cultural determinations, and social agencies that enable us to perform violence, abstain from performing violence, and contemplate occurrences of violence – refine our capacity to not only identify violence toward other animals, including other members of our own species, but also understand the ways violence shapes our being and relating within ecological networks, so that we can become better, or at least more self-aware, actors in our ecological communities. (PD)

Background One of the successful measures to curb COVID-19 spread in large populations is the implementation of a movement restriction order. Globally, it was observed that countries implementing strict movement control were more successful in controlling the spread of the virus as compared with those with less stringent measures. Society’s adherence to the movement control order has helped expedite the process to flatten the pandemic curve as seen in countries such as China and Malaysia. At the same time, there are countries facing challenges with society’s nonconformity toward movement restriction orders due to various claims such as human rights violations as well as sociocultural and economic issues. In Indonesia, society’s adherence to its large-scale social restrictions (LSSRs) order is also a challenge to achieve. Indonesia is regarded as among the worst in Southeast Asian countries in terms of managing the spread of COVID-19. It is proven by the increased number of daily confirmed cases and the total number of deaths, which was more than 6.21% (1351/21,745) of total active cases as of May 2020. Objective The aim of this study was to explore public sentiments and emotions toward the LSSR and identify issues, fear, and reluctance to observe this restriction among the Indonesian public. Methods This study adopts a sentiment analysis method with a supervised machine learning approach on COVID-19-related posts on selected media platforms (Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube). The analysis was also performed on COVID-19-related news contained in more than 500 online news platforms recognized by the Indonesian Press Council. Social media posts and news originating from Indonesian online media between March 31 and May 31, 2020, were analyzed. Emotion analysis on Twitter platform was also performed to identify collective public emotions toward the LSSR. Results The study found that positive sentiment surpasses other sentiment categories by 51.84% (n=1,002,947) of the total data (N=1,934,596) collected via the search engine. Negative sentiment was recorded at 35.51% (686,892/1,934,596) and neutral sentiment at 12.65% (244,757/1,934,596). The analysis of Twitter posts also showed that the majority of public have the emotion of “trust” toward the LSSR. Conclusions Public sentiment toward the LSSR appeared to be positive despite doubts on government consistency in executing the LSSR. The emotion analysis also concluded that the majority of people believe in LSSR as the best method to break the chain of COVID-19 transmission. Overall, Indonesians showed trust and expressed hope toward the government’s ability to manage this current global health crisis and win against COVID-19.

This study discusses the determination of order delivery time in the event organizer (EO) industry. With regard to the characteristics of the EO production process that is identical to the job shop production process in the manufacturing industry, a non-delay scheduling approach is applied. The non-delay schedule is compiled using the non-delay algorithm with the criteria for makespan minimization. Job assignment is done using the shortest processing time (SPT), longest processing time (LPT), and first comes first served (FCFS) priority rules. We consider the situation where all orders arrive simultaneously (offline) and at different time (online). As a case study, the modified non-delay algorithm is examined to solve the problem of an EO in Indonesia. The results of the study show that the nondelay algorithm using SPT rule provides the best schedule performance which results in the shortest makespan and the lowest resource idle time. In addition to determining the delivery time, the resulting non-delay schedule can be used to control the execution of each order. The method of determining order delivery time in this study can be applied to other service industries. Further study can be developed for situations where order arrival and processing time are probabilistic. Furthermore, it is also necessary to consider the balanced distribution of the workload among operators. Determination of Order Delivery Time in Event

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam pengujian undang-undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 (UUD NRI 1945) dengan amar tidak dapat diterima atau niet ontvankelijke verklaard (NO) pada umumnya tidak memiliki pertimbangan hukum. Akan tetapi dalam perkembangannya MK memberikan pertimbangan hukum baik mengenai pokok perkara dan kedudukan hukum Pemohon. Penelitian ini hendak menjawab dua permasalahan yaitu; apa urgensi adanya pertimbangan hukum yang mengandung judicial order dalam putusan dengan amar tidak dapat diterima? Kemudian bagaimana karakteristik judicial order dalam putusan dengan amar tidak dapat diterima? Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif dengan metode pengumpulan data melalui studi pustaka. Penelitian ini mengelompokkan putusan yang memiliki amar NO dari tahun 2003 sampai dengan 2018 yang berjumlah 375 putusan. Dari jumlah tersebut, putusan NO yang memiliki pertimbangan hukum sebanyak 71 putusan. Penelitian ini menemukan 3 putusan yang didalam pertimbangan hukumnya terdapat judicial order yakni Putusan 105/PUU-XIV/2016, Putusan 57/PUU-XV/2017, dan Putusan 98/PUU-XVI/2018. Simpulan dari penelitian ini adalah putusan dengan amar Tidak Dapat Diterima yang memuat judicial order selalu berkaitan dengan implementasi putusan yang tidak berjalan sebagaimana mestinya. MK menegaskan kembali sifat final dan binding Putusan MK serta sifat putusan MK yang declatoir konstitutif melalui putusan a quo. Karakteristik judicial order dalam ketiga a quo adalah ketika MK memberikan peringatan konstitusional secara bertahap (gradual). Pada Putusan 105/PUU-XIV/2016 MK menegaskan bahwa pengabaian putusan MK merupakan perbuatan melawan hukum, selanjutnya pada putusan 57/PUU-XV/2017 MK tegaskan sifat putusan yang self executing dan yang paling mendasar adalah pada putusan 98/PUU-XVI/2018 yang menyatakan bahwa lembaga atau masyarakat yang tidak menjalankan putusan MK merupakan pembangkangan terhadap konstitusi. Lahirnya pertimbangan tersebut sebagai ikhtiar menegakkan supremasi konstitusi dan marwah Mahkamah Konstitusi.Decisions of the Constitutional Court in judicial review of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (1945 Constitution) with an unacceptable verdict or niet ontvankelijke verklaard (NO) generally do not have legal considerations. However, in its development the Court gave legal considerations both on the subject matter and legal position of the Petitioner. This research wants to answer why is the Constitutional Court gives judgment (judicial order) to the case with the unacceptable verdict? What are the legal consequences of legal considerations in the unacceptable verdict on compliance with the Constitutional Court's decision? This research is a normative legal research with data collection method through literature study. This study grouped the decisions that had NO verdicts from 2003 to 2018 totaling 375 decisions. From all of those, NO verdicts that have legal considerations are 71. This study found 3 decisions that have judicial orders in their legal considerations namely Decision 105/PUU-XIV/2016, Decision 57/PUU-XV/2017, and Decision 98/PUU-XVI/2018. The conclusion of this research is that an unacceptable verdict that contains a judicial order is always related to the implementation of a decision that does not work as it should. The Court reaffirmed the final and binding character of the Constitutional Court's decision as well as the character of the Constitutional Court's decision which declared constitutive through a quo decision. The characteristic of judicial order in the three a quo is when the Constitutional Court gives a gradual constitutional warning. In Decision 105/PUU-XIV/2016 the Constitutional Court confirmed that the disregard for the Constitutional Court's decision was an act against the law, then in the decision 57/PUU-XV/2017 the Constitutional Court affirmed the character of the decision that was self-executing and the most basic was the decision 98/PUU-XVI/2018 which states that an institution or community that does not carry out the Constitutional Court's decision is a defiance of the constitution. The birth of these considerations is as an effort to uphold the supremacy of the constitution and the spirit of the Constitutional Court.