ARTICLE
TITLE

Open Court Principle for The Public in Material Judicial Review Right in The Supreme Court 10.30641/dejure.2022.V22.387-394

   
   
Andryan Andryan  

SUMMARY

The Supreme Court (MA) has the authority legality review on regulations under the law against the law as stated in Article 34A paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. Unlike the Constitutional Court (MK) in the examination process until the ruling applies Open Court Principle the Supreme Court does not implement it because apply the legal provisions that apply to the application case in the shortest possible time. This research uses normative legal research methods with conceptual approaches, philosophical approaches and statute approach. “There are two research questions of this study namely why is the principle of the trial open to the public in the right of judicial review in the MA in the concept of modern legal states and what is the constitutional basis for a trial open to the public based on the principle of Audi et Alteram Partem.? Based on principle as law country, Indonesia should emphasize on transparency to make public decision at court so that justice will prevail. The Supreme Court can make rule that accommodate the spirit of a trial that is open to the public as in the principle of Audi et Alteram Partem.

 Articles related

Evan Gerstmann,Christopher Shortell    

In this paper, we argue that there is no single test called strict scrutiny when the Court considers claims of racial discrimination. In fact, the Court changes the rules depending on why and how the government is using race. By examining racial redistri... see more


Indriati Amarini 10.20884/1.jdh.2018.18.3.1960    

Recruitment of judges is an instrument to produce high quality and integrity judges. There are some different views related to the authorized institution to carry out career judges recruitment. It makes Indonesian Judges Association (Ikahi) proposes Judi... see more


Robert Hamilton, Joshua Nichols    

The recent Ktunaxa Nation decision of the Supreme Court of Canada provides an opportunity to discuss the fundamental legal presumptions that underlie the Crown’s duty to consult and accommodate Aboriginal peoples. The jurisprudence in this area has been ... see more


Bruce Feldthusen    

Typically, government liability in tort depends on whether the government in question,through legislation, has consented to be held liable for its otherwise tortious acts. However,the Supreme Court of Canada has behaved in an activist manner by ignoring ... see more


Amy Conroy, Teresa Scassa    

The pressure towards open data and proactive disclosure by government in Canada has created a renewed need to balance the competing values of transparency and privacy. This article addresses issues such as what constitutes personal information and theref... see more