1. Page | 1
REGISTRATION OF LEGISLATION SYSTEM:
"The Effectiveness of Presidential Veto in Government System
in Indonesia Based on NRI 1945 Constitution "
La Ode Muhammad Elwan
Lecturer of Faculty of Administrative Sciences Halu Oleo University
ABSTRACT
The President as the holder of the mandate of executive power has the authority and absolute
sovereignty because the presidential office is elected directly by the people through the General
Elections system in Indonesia. In the Indonesian Government Systems president is holding the
highest government authority under the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (Constitution
NRI) of 1945. The power of the president, after amendment 4 (four) of the Constitution of 1945
NRI shifting function and role as a result of the magnitude current political interest, so that seems
almost entirely on the president's powers in the Constitution NRI legislative authority in
1945 mostly do not have a fixed legal force and formal juridical material in our country even if
the actual substance of the legislative authority president when a presidential government system
is not owned.
This fact then, the president as mandate holders of executive power should be able to carry out
the role and functions as Head of State and Head of Government in order to realize the purpose
of the state and nation for the entire product legislation is born by the legislature (DPR) is fully
geared to the realization of the mandate of the Act in the form of development programs and
legally mandate is carried out by the President together with cabinets and other state agencies
(executive). Normally, the development process must be designed from Downstream to
Muara. Hopefully, between the legislature and the executive together with the judiciary walk in
rhythm and mutual support concretely positive there is a balance of authority and mutual
monitoring (principle of checks and balances) in translating, a constitutional mandate that
applies relevant legislative authority in Indonesia. Based on observations, review of the literature
contained in books, papers, newspapers, scientific articles, jo u rnal, and legislation (screenplay
Constitution NRI 1945 and Law No. 12 of 2011) as the object under study and the methodology
this writing, s ehingga authors are interested in and make the title "The effectiveness
Presidential Veto In Government System in Indonesia Based on the Constitution of
Republic of Indonesia Year 1945".
This paper concludes: (1) The Veto of the President is not effective when examined in the
constitutional document of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia; (2) There
was inconsistent in the Presidential Government System of Indonesia with the content of the
articles in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia; (3) the lack of courage of state
institutions (legislative, and judicial eksektuif) konstitusonal to restore the rights of Parliament,
the President and the Judiciary in the Constitution NRI 1945; (4) recommended some changes
(if required no amendment) NRI in the Constitution of 1945 and Law No. 12 of 2011 Concerning
the Establishment of Legislation to be followed by the MPR (penjelmahan DPR and DPD) and
the President; (5) Presidential Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perppu), according to the authors
should absolutely be given to the President without the intervention of the House for the President
as Head of State of the State and has the power Government Top under the Constitution NRI
1945 (the substance of a presidential veto) and restore the constitutional rights of the president
fully in Act as a basis to consider prinsisp checks and balances between state institutions.
Keywords: Veto President, Presidential Government Systems, NRI Constitution
of 1945, checks and balances between state institutions.
2. Page | 2
I. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale
According to Carl J. Friedrich in his book, Constitutional Government
and Democracy, constitutionalism implies the idea that the government organized by and on
behalf of the people subject to some restrictions that are expected to ensure that power is held
not misused by those who have the task to govern (Marzuki 2010 : 4).
Therefore, the issues that are considered important and the spirit in every constitution is
the arrangement of control or limitation of governmental power (Asshidiqie, 2010: 18). Enabling
the idea of constitutionalism in the constitution, at least need to adopt several things: (1)
System Separation of Power or Distribution of Power (separation of powers) accompanied
by checks and balances; (2) an independent and independent Judicial Power System, primarily
empowering administrative courts; (3) Recognition of civil and political rights of citizens,
particularly in relation to elections and elections; (4) Restrictions on the period of public office
in the state; (5) Provide constitutional complaints authority (constitutional complaint) to the
Constitutional Court.
Before further discussing what and how the presidential veto on this writing, we should
have the same pastures and answers related to plan their assertion of presidential government
system in our country.
The question is, whether serious and consistent body of our power (Parliament, President
and Institutions Law State) returns the System Administration Presindensiil substance in
Indonesia? This question must first be answered, by three (trio ac tor) state in control in this
nation. Alternatively j awabannya only 2 (two), if consistent and serious then return the entire
constitutional rights (rights legislation) Parliament as holder of legislative power in
Indonesia.Consequently, all product-related legislation and there is a decision of the president
and his cabinet intervention. That is, immediately do a revision or complete change (amendment)
of the Constitution of 1945 and the product NRI Act that the substance is no involvement of the
president in the legislation. (assuming, only to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia
and the product of the Act). The second answer is that if the trio of actors inconsistent state and
seriously, it would require the collective consciousness to consider the equal rights and
obligations as good citizens, that is to say that, we return to the substance of the President and
Parliament are equally elected by the people so that the necessary principle of check and
Ballances (supervision and balance) to be put in a fair and judicious in the state constitution NRI
Constitution of 1945 and the entire product legislation in our country. The assumption is that if
we are not consistent, then a couple of things that need to be identified and carried perbaikaan as
the purpose of this paper related to a presidential veto in the Constitution NRI 1945.
The current reality is that the constitution of the state of Indonesia, namely the 1945
Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (UUD NRI) is still far from the spirit of
constitutionalism itself, although in its journey has changed four times, the first in 1999, the
second of 2000, third in 2001, and the fourth change in 2002. Even that is unfortunate is the
constitutional practice during the validity of the Constitution NRI Indonesia in 1945 would bring
the country into political authoritarianism and disregard for the principles of
a constitutional state (MPR 2004: 12).
With the result of that change, it gives a reduced impact of presidential system adopted
by the state of Indonesia. L egislative heavy can be seen from some of the clauses in the
3. Page | 3
Constitution NRI 1945 which indicates the DPR too dominant, including in Article 11 (1) and
(2), Article 13, Article 14 paragraph (2), Article 20 paragraph (1 ), and Article 20 paragraph (5).
In another context, the constitution of 1945 NRI also provides legislative authority to the
President as mandated by Article 20 paragraph (2) which reads "Every bill is discussed by the
Parliament and the President for approval together". This is certainly not relevant to the
presidential system. Although it can not be denied that the presidential system in the 1945
Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia is more pure, but in exercising its authority, the
Constitution does not specify when the President is positioned as Head of State and when it is
positioned as Head of Government. The Constitution only specifies the position of President as
Head of Government (Article 4 paragraph 1), does not mention the position of President as Head
of State.
Furthermore, the position of the President as Head of State is mandated by several constitutional
rights regulated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia:
1. The President as Head of State holds the highest authority over the Army, Navy, and
Air Force (Article 10 paragraph (1).
2. President as Head of State with the approval of the People's Legislative Assembly
declares war, makes peace and agreements with other countries (Article 11 paragraph (1)
3. The President as Head of State in making other international agreements, arising from
extensive and fundamental to the lives of the people in relation to state
financial burden, and / or upgrade required to change or formation of the legislation
should be approved by the Board of Representatives (Article 11 (2).
4. The President as Head of State declares a state of hazard whose terms and consequences
are established by law (Article 12).
5. The President as Head of State grant pardons, amnesty, abolition and rehabilitation by
taking into consideration the Supreme Court (Article 14 paragraph 1 and 2).
6. The President as Head of State gives title, service marks, and other honor signs regulated
by law (Article 15).
The above description explains that the Indonesian Constitution provides the mandate to
make laws or legislation to the two institutions, namely the authority of the legislation of the
executive body regulated in Article 5 and Article 20 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution of
1945, and the legislation authority of the legislative body is regulated in Article 20 paragraph (1
) and Article 20A Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. The
legislative authority of the article provides certainty that no product of the Law is born in
Indonesia without the involvement of the two institutions.
Here's legislative authority under the authority of the President as provided in the Constitution
of NRI 1945.
1. The President is entitled to submit a bill to the House of Representatives (First
Amendment Article 5 paragraph (1)
2. The President establishes a government regulation to enforce legislation as appropriate.
(Article 5 paragraph (2).
3. In the case of crucial matters, the President shall be entitled to enact a substitute
government regulation (Perppu). (Article 22 paragraph (1).
However, the authority of the state institutions (the president and parliament), when we examine
more deeply on the articles of the Constitution NRI 1945 appears identified clearly and
unequivocally that the constitution we are on four (4) times the amendment authorizes
4. Page | 4
unbalanced in both institutions the. Legislative authority as the president of the supreme
government authority in our country is very not legally binding and kewengan legislation the
president merely "SYMBOL" taped (validation stamp holder) on every product Act in NRI
Constitution of 1945. The question arises, how do the right kontitusinal (veto) the president
of the legislative authority in the Constitution NRI Year 1945?
Textually or explicitly, the state constitution does not specify the existence of a veto right,
but based on the juridical fact of the President is given the right to reject a draft law submitted
by the House of Representatives. This is in line with the definition of a veto that is the right to
express rejection or disagreement with a Draft Law (RUU) and or on the matter of a Draft
Law. http://www.KamusBahasaIndonesia.org accessed on October 10, 2017 21:33 hours local
time). In principle, the constitutional amendment to the Reformation Era (1999-2002) gave rise
to a new norm that the president had been granted the right to use "a kind of veto" to declare a
rejection of the bill discussed in the House court.Of course the president's "veto" considerations
philosophical, juridical, and sociological, which is owned by the president. Because, in the end
the executive most responsible in any implementation of the law
as law institutions aplication function.
If the president considers that the draft law to be approved into law can pose a danger and cause
difficulties in its implementation including state security issues, the president can either refuse
or disagree. The concept of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, the full
accountability of the president. Given the importance of this, institutionally, "responsibility"
should not be delegated to anyone.
This "veto" is always a debate in Indonesian state administration practice with various reasons
and considerations, because the veto is often viewed from the political side. On this basis, this
paper is keen to discuss the relevant legislation rearrangement VetoPresident of
the Government Construction in Indonesia Based on NRI Constitution in 1945.
1.2. Formulation of the problem
Based on the above rationale, this article tries to elaborate into some questions as follows:
1. Does it require a rearrangement of legislation on Pres iden Veto
effectiveness in Government System in Indonesia based NRI Constitution of 1945?
2. How to influence Veto President in achieving the government through principle checks
and balances?
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Veto
The first amendment process until the fourth of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of
Indonesia has given birth to a new norm and a new mechanism in the formation of laws. When
examined by juridical academic, final formulation in Article 5 and Article 20 of the Constitution
NRI In 1945, after the amendment, whether conscious or not Article -
pasal formulation consisting of five (5) The verse
is "material and formal juridical" give kan "Veto" to the president. Simply put, "Veto" is derived
from Latin word which means I forbid or I refused. This is in accordance with Indonesian
dictionary there is a sense that the word "veto" is a constitutional right of the president / ruler /
holders government to prevent, stated, reject, or cancel the decision, cancel / prohibit
absolutely. While vetoing has the meaning of veto power to cancel / refuse keputuasan. While
5. Page | 5
the veto is the right to cancel the decision, statutes, draft regulations and draft laws or resolutions.
( Www.KamusBahasaIndonesia.org . Retrieved on October 10, 2017 21:15 hours local time).
The state of Indonesia's veto is the right to expressly refuse or disagree with any Draft
Act (RUU) or on the matter of a Draft Law. The existence of a veto becomes a powerful weapon
possessed by the president when it does not agree to a Draft Law (Draft) proposed by the House
of Representatives. Furthermore, Patrialis Akbar mention that there is no veto in the state system
of Indonesia, but there is only the President The Constitutional Rights. (http:
// www.merdeka.com accessed on October 10, 2017 hours 21:33 pm)
2.2. Presidential Government System
Legitimacy directly from the people sectoral ego sometimes cause the legislature to the
executive because Indonesia did not subscribe to the theory trias politica purely in the
constitution and system of government used dipertegasnya.
As said by Jimly Asshiddiqie:
"Indonesian government system is intended as a Presidential system. Both in explanation and in
the general sense. However, here and there, there is a similarity and conditions that
are overlapping between idealized presidential system with a parliamentary system
elements. "(Jimly Asshiddiqie, 2010).
According Jimly Asshiddiqie in his book mentioned that the presidential system of government
has mbilan se character as follows: (1) There is a clear separation of powers between the
executive and legislative branches of power; (2) The President is a sole executive. The executive
power of the president is not divided and there is only the president and vice president. (3) The
head of government is at the same time the head of state or otherwise the head of state is the head
of government: (4) the President appoints ministers as petty or as responsible subordinates to
him; (5) MPs shall not occupy executive positions and vice versa: (6) The President can not
dissolve or force parliament; (7) If the parliamentary system applies the principle of
parliamentary supremacy, then in principle presidential principle applies supremacy of the
constitution. Therefore the executive government is accountable to the constitution; (8) The
executive is directly responsible to the sovereign; (9) The power is spread centrally as in a
parliamentary system centered on parliament. (Jimly Asshiddiqie, 2010). Logically, the
application of the system of presidential government in Indonesia as much as possible to
actualize the nine characters Issuer presidential government system.
The reality that occurs, based on the character traits of the first there is no clear separation of
powers between the branches of executive and legislative power.
There is a clear separation between executive and legislative powers, in the presidential
government system. With a separate connection pattern presidential system of government are at
least four basic advantages possessed namely: first by directly elected, the president's powers
become more legitimet it gets a direct mandate from the voters. While in the parliamentary
system of perdanamentri in lift through appointment. Both the separation between state
institutions, especially between the holder of executive power by the holder of legislative
power. With such separation between state institutions can supervise other institutions to prevent
the accumulation and abuse of power. Three in a central position in the executive branch
president can take the crucial strategic policies quickly and accurately. Four with a fixed tenure
6. Page | 6
of the president's position is much more stable diandingkan prime minister who can be replaced
setap time. (Jimly Asshiddiqie, 2007).
III. METHODOLOGY
The methodology used in this paper is to elaborate on the data sources supported b erdasarkan
observations, review of the literature contained in books, papers, newspapers, scientific articles,
journals, and legislation such as (screenplay Constitution NRI 1945 and Law No. 12 of 2011)
as the object studied, s ehingga authors are interested in and make the title "The effectiveness
Presidential Veto In Government System in Indonesia Based on the Constitution of
Republic of Indonesia Year 1945".
IV. DISCUSSION
Effectiveness of the President's Veto Rights in the Governance System in Indonesia Based
on the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia
The process of legislation according to the formulation of the 1945 Constitution of 1945
result of amendment is done by two institutions together, namely DPR and President. Article 20
(1) Constitution NRI 1945 states that "the House of Representatives holds the power to make
law." In Article 5 (1) states "The president is entitled to submit a bill to the House of
Representatives." And Article 20 paragraph ( 2) states that, "Every Bill is discussed by the House
of Representatives and the President for approval together".
Through the three Articles, it can be implicitly implied that both the President and the
House of Representatives basically have the right to reject a draft law that is not in line with
expectations. This right is then familiarly known as the "veto" in the legislation process. This is
evident from the phrase "get the joint approval" in Article 20 paragraph (2) of the 1945
Constitution. The purpose of Article 20 paragraph (2) is, the House of Representatives in
proposing the bill to be discussed together must get presidential approval and vice president in
proposing the bill to be discussed together must get approval from the House. This means that
both have the right to veto to reject / not accept the bill. Furthermore, in article 20 paragraph (4)
the president passes a draft law that has been mutually agreed to become law. The meaning of
this article gives space to the president not to pass the bill into law. What if this condition
happens? in this article there is a presidential veto to reject a draft law.
"Veto President" re not apply, as in Article 20 (5) Constitution NRI Year 1945 which
reads, in the case of a bill that has been agreed upon is not authorized by the president within 30
(thirty) days since the bill is approved, the bill the valid as Law and mandatory promulgation.
In response, if the Presidential veto is placed only in the process of ratification of the draft
law, of course the right becomes an existing thing but as if nothing. Why this is so, because, the
conception of "endorsement" as contained in Article 20 (5) Constitution NRI 1945 only mere
administrative nature, (Yuda, 2010: 259).
That is, without any approval from the President any draft law will remain a law after the time
limit which has been determined (30 days).
Has the President's Veto Rights been used in Indonesia?
To note that the presidential veto has been used in the state administration system in
Indonesia. Evidently there are several laws that are clearly fixed in the legislature even without
the president's approval and the law is still valid in Indonesia, such as
1. UU no. 32 Year 2002 on Broadcasting, there has been considerable resistance by most
broadcasters.
7. Page | 7
2. UU no. 25 of 2002 on Riau Islands, there has been pro-cons between the people of Riau
itself.
3. UU no. 18 of 2003 on Advocate Profession, there has been a very complicated debate in
which Sharia scholars are allowed to become Advocates.
4. UU no. 17 Year 2003 on State Finance, there has been a conflict of interest among interen
government agencies, such as Bapenas with the Ministry of Finance.
5. Bill of Regional Head Election (Law No. 22/2014 on the Election of Governors, Regents
and Mayors), which has been approved in the plenary session of the House of
Representatives. Although the president refuses to sign and endorse it, the legislation
product will remain in effect. Finally, it was approved on September 26, 2014 and ratified
in early October 2014. At the same time, the President made a substitute government
regulation (Perppu) to revoke the law. Again, however, the fate of the Perppu depends on
the approval of the DPR. If the DPR does not approve it, then it should be revoked,
according to Article 22 paragraph (2) and (3) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of
Indonesia
6. Another case as a bad presendent, namely when discussing the Free Trade Zone Free
Trade Zone (FTZ) Batam. President Megawati Soekarnoputri was not pleased with the
formulation of a number of articles in the House's initiative bill. Tail, Menkumham Yusril
Ihza Mahendra and a number of ministers withdrew from discussions with the House. "If
the DPR agrees, but the president does not, the bill can not be passed into law," Yusril
said at the time. (republica.com_Rabu, 15 October 2014, 14:00 WIB).
7. The presidential veto was used in the days of President Sukarno and Soeharto and it was
effective. For example, the July 5 presidential decree, broadcasting law, hazard law, both
laws were rejected by the president and proven to be unenforceable.
Examples of the above cases show the impasse of communication is lost between the
Executive and legislature in the formation of legislation, a veto right kibatnya President toothless
like a toothless tiger, has no power forced or any implications.Therefore, to avoid such a few
cases above, it should be a constitutional right (veto) rejection of the president must be
placed properly.
To think together, there are a number of laws enacted without the approval and
endorsement of the President, How it is when seen from the science of law?
Judging from the science of legislation, in fact we can not only see from Article 20 paragraph (5)
because in fact here is something that does not sync between Article 5 paragraph (1) and Article
20 of the 1945 Constitution of NRI. Why? Before amendment, Article 5 says the president holds
the power to make laws with the approval of Parliament. But now Article 5, paragraph
(1) President of the "entitled" filed a bill. So the President is not mandatory, just entitled. It
means that if the president does not want any law, the president does not propose the bill. In the
first and second amendments the authority was delegated to the Parliament. If we look at Article
20 (1) Parliament holds the power to make laws. Means that must form the Act is the House. But
in the following verses, Article 20 (2) of each bill is discussed by the Parliament and the
President for approval together. Logically, if the proposed bill is the House of Representatives,
why should be approved also by the president. this is not consistent name.Except on the contrary,
the bill is proposed by the president (executive), it is only discussed and approved jointly by the
House and the President.
Then, being biased again after Article 20 (4) The President passed a bill that has been agreed
upon to become law. Means that to become law because the President and endorsement
endorsement was realized with the signature of the institution / the authorities. So, here then we
become blurred bin gung and interpret the substance, the legislature, the President or the
Parliament? Since Article 20 Paragraph (4) is clear, the right to legalize to become a Law is the
President. Furthermore, if we relate to Article 20 paragraph (5), then here is the contradiction
that the President who must pass this law is then given the authority not to legalize. Because it is
8. Page | 8
written in paragraph (5), in terms of an agreed bill is not signed by the President within 30 days
since the bill is approved, the bill becomes law valid and must be legislated.
The legal language should not provide multiple interpretations, as it will lead to different
understandings and actions. Moreover, this article is written in the Constitution NRI 1945 as a
state constitutional basis. As the word mandatory in paragraph (5), means that if there is no
sanctions. But, what sanctions? If there are additional subsequent verses that affirm sanctions, it
is permissible. That is, the phrase "The bill is legitimately into law and must be
enacted". Supposedly the sentence "and enacted", says the obligatory eliminated, which means
it must be enacted and should be done by the president not as an obligation that no sanction
means therein.
So, we can use the authority's president, Article 20 Paragraph (4) it is said, the president had to
pass the bill to become law, but paragraph (5) required the president was also forced to pass the
bill even if the president refused / do not approve of the bill.Article 20 paragraph (5) is an
underdeveloped verse.
In b ahasa law, "enactment" is putting a law which legalized the President in a gazette.
Jimly Asshiddiqie said that, "the promulgation of a law that is not signed by the president is an
enactment that is done by unauthorized official (onbevoegheid)". (Jimly Asshiddiqie, 2006).
Then, in Article 85 of Law No. 12 of 2011 on the establishment of legislation which is obliged
to enact is the Minister of Law and Human Rights. If so, what is the ministerial position against
the president? Its president has been clearly rejected (veto) toenact, future ministers dare to enact,
the answer is because in order byother legislation, if so who could rule Menkumham it is twofold,
president and legislation. So, if the verse behind actually disregards the previous verse. It just
means the president only the authority to give a stamp / signature attestation only (holders stamp),
it's become a strange but true. But it must be remembered that within the organization and
management there is also law. Organization and management of law adage says, "The authority
can be delegated, but responsibility can not be delegated."
Therefore, the language and sentence contained in the Bill and the law must be clear and
measurable and well understood by all the people because it is general and binding (legitimate
and enacted).
To note, in the system of legislation adopted here at home after the amendment of the
Constitution NRI 1945 presidential opportunity to kill the bill can only be done at the discussion
stage and or at least in the collective agreement against rancangang phrases legislation. So if the
president uses a veto at the time of mutual agreement between the government (the minister
assigned by the president) with the House then it can be said to be too late because the presidential
veto becomes worthless (see Article 20 paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic
of Indonesia) . Then, in this article when the president does not authorize the draft of the law into
law, it is certain that the president still does not violate Indonesian law or constitution.The
implication is that the president can not implement the law so that the consequences of substance
and the meaning of the law have no meaning because it is imposed and may even create an
institutional and even personal conflict of interest between the legislature and the
executive. Under these circumstances, the question arises; how the effectiveness of the veto or
the constitutional rights owned by the president of the regulatory system in Indonesia?
The effectiveness of the presidential veto is very effective, when, the president uses his / her veto
right at the stage of discussion and approval of the bill between the president and the House. if
the president veto at the ratification anything else at the time of the promulgation of the veto has
to be said is not effective, because it is already included in the collective agreement (Article 20
(2) of 1945 Constitution NRI).
Said effective veto when, a presidential veto (refusal) when used applies absolutely and
implemented (revoked / are deleted). But the veto in Indonesia today proved ineffective because
9. Page | 9
of what is in the veto by the president remains well performed, even if later there or no testing
material through judicial rivew by the Court K Brazilian Constitution. This situation appears to
be ascertained president with his will , and Parliament also with his will . Indonesia as a country
of law, then obviously the articles problematic in the Constitution NRI of 1945 related to "veto"
(constitutional rights) president and Parliament should be reconsidered to be improved so as to
avoid the mistake of interpreting passages in the law and its implementation so that the
principle che c k and balances against state institutions can be effectively implemented .
Here are some articles of the Constitution NRI 1945 and Act No. 12 of 2011 Concerning the
Establishment of Laws and undagan which explains the legislative authority the Parliament and
the President to do the review (revised / deleted) to fulfill the principle of che c k and balances in
Indonesia ,
Authority Legislation the President set out in the Basic Law of 1945 NRI contained in Article 22
paragraph (1) "In the happenings crunch that forced the president has the right set of government
regulations in lieu of law (Perppu)". This regulation has the nature of a formal juridical equivalent
/ equivalent with legislation.
Here too, the president legislative authority in the Law NO.12 Year 2011 Concerning the
Establishment Regulation Legislation in Article 1 (4), Article 11, Article 23 paragraph (2),
Article 43 paragraph (1), Article 49, Article 50, Article 51, Article 52, Article 53, Article 65
paragraph (1), Article 68 paragraph (2 and 3), Article 69 paragraph (1 point c) and subsection
(3), Article 71, Article 72, Article 73, Article 82 points a, and specifically Article 85 related to
the authority of the minister lAW and human rights as officials who signed the legislation
products in Indonesia.
Similarly, only with some legislation (legislation) that is supposed to be the authority of the
president as head of state and head of government got the intervention of Parliament on the
implementation. Among them is the Constitution NRI YEAR 1945 Section 11 (1), Article 13
paragraph (2) and (3), Article 14 paragraph (2), Article 15, Article 23 paragraph (2) and
(3), P origin 23e paragraph ( 2) and (3), Article 23f paragraph (1), Article 24a paragraph (3),
Article 24b paragraph (3), Article 24c paragraph (2) and (3).
Related to "Veto" President, here are five (5) proposed to be improved, both changes
(amendment in the Constitution NRI 1945) or make Bill's new, or revise Law No. 12 of 2011
Concerning the Establishment Regulations -Undangan and or other laws that are then formulated
into the articles of the notion of repeated changes.
first ; autonomously and absolute special legislative authority of President as provided in the
Constitution of NRI 1945 contained in Article 22 paragraph (1) "In the happenings crunch that
forced the president has the right set of government regulations in lieu of law (Perppu)". This
regulation has the nature of a formal juridical equivalent / equivalent with legislation. Very
ineffective and even human respect constitutional rights (veto) president if parliament granted
the right to revoke the draft Presidential Regulation in Lieu of Law. Should be revoked, if the
charge of the regulation has more to meet the political Kentingan official / personal / group,
political party, or organization / agency / commission state (the potential for corruption),
and should not be revoked , On condition that when the charge in the regulation has concerns
the interests of the people or the lives of many people as a fundamental, state security, human
rights, politics and international relations, the constitutional rights of the judiciary (Mahkama
Constitution, the Commission yusial, MA, etc.) because the judiciary must is independent and
absolute deng beirisan not an interest of Parliament and the President and all of it of course is
based on the recommendations and considerations DPR rationally and objectively to justify the
president's decision to pemikirian similar PERPPU Act.
second ; Strengthening the presidential system, this proposal does not intend to restore
Indonesia's authoritarian regime by giving more authority to the President, but to balance the
10. Page | 10
power of the President as the Executive and Parliament as the legislative. So there is no longer a
phenomenon legislative authority over or executive authority over, some people also call
it legislative heavy and heavy executive. K AUTHORITY legislature in shaping and discussing
the laws under its authority is absolute. This is in line with the characteristics of the presidential
system that says that the president is not a part of parliament and strengthened by the theory Trias
Politica mentioning that ekuasaan branches, executive, legislative and judicial branches of
government must be separate from one another, both on the task (function) as well as the fittings
(organ) who organize it . Thus, eliminating the legislative function of the President is the right
choice in order to strengthen the presidential system of government in Indonesia. But that there
is a mechanism of checks and balances ( checks and balances) between the president and
parliament on the legislative function, the President granted veto on a bill that has been approved
by Parliament.
Third; The President was given veto power in the passage of legislation. This idea departs from
anxiety to Article 20 paragraph 5 of the Constitution NRI 1945 which states that " In the case
of a bill that has been agreed upon is not signed by the President within thirty days of the draft
law has been approved, the draft legislation legally become law and shall be promulgated " .
The sound of that article gives the sense that the president has no other alternative than to approve
a bill submitted by the Parliament.
Citing what is conveyed by Patrialis Akbar, several articles in the Constitution NRI 1945 ( Article
20 (1) In Article 5, paragraph (1) and Article 20 (2) can be interpreted that ( Patrialis Akbar,
2013: 201) :
1. Legislation power completely Men- Parliament downgrade legislative authority of the
President, because the President was granted the right to submit a bill and discuss it
together with a bill.
2. Neither the Parliament nor the President has veto power, namely in the form of refusing
a discussion and approval of the bill in the House is always represented by his aides or
ministries / agencies appointed. President's order could also be a refusal to discuss a
bill. But for parliamentary fractions derived from the governing party, would be a
separate issue because it must go through a compromise even voting in a discussion with
a decided rejection of the bill.
3. Veto is not a forbidden even possible within a democratic state pursued through
democratic procedure itself.
A concrete definition of a presidential veto in this notion should be interpreted as a right that is
not only placed on the process of ratification of the nature of the administration alone, but is
absolute to be revisited given behind the refusal of the President passed a bill into law are the
legal consequences binding on the legislature. That is, the bill should be discussed again by the
legislature to re-approval in the House. Of course, can be done by transferring the articles of the
Constitution or the NRI 1945 and Law No. 12 Year 2011 on the Establishment of Legislation
related to the discussion of the mechanism (revised) a bill that was rejected by the president.
Later, the President is not over kapacity in using the right of veto, a veto may be rejected by the
Parliament with certain requirements, one example the support of majority of the House about
2/3 vote of the number of members of Parliament who attended the hearing peripurna and
attended by at least 2/3 of the number of members of Parliament. Some other ideas are still in
this respect, the first in the veto, the President must include the reason or consideration of
objections clearly and objectively to Parliament; and both the President be given no later than 30
days in assessing the results of the bill by the Parliament. Thus it is clear that the granting veto
power to the President to reinforce the separation of powers ( sparation of power ) Between the
legislative and the executive.
Of some of the proposed changes to Article 20 of the Constitution NRI 1945, tried to convert it
into the language of law as follows: only related legislation after the order sequence, then the
regulations that are under the law (Act), in this discussion is not recommended for do
change. (NRI Constitution of 1945 and Law No.12 of 2011 on the Establishment of Legislation.
11. Page | 11
As complete as can be seen in the table below:
Constitution NRI YEAR 1945
NO PREVIOUS AMENDMENT
1. specifically in Article 5 (1):
"The president is entitled to submit a bill to
Parliament"
If consistent, Article 5, paragraph (1) is
removed, the president merely assign a substitute
PERPPU Act and Regulation . (presidential
veto is absolute )
If not consistent, Article 5, paragraph (1) is
not removed
2 Article 20 (2):
Each bill is discussed by the Parliament and
the President for approval together.
No changes
with additional chapters:
Paragraph (3): Parliament proposed a bill that
does not require the approval and endorsement
of the president. (Rights of the Parliament
legislation)
Paragraph (4):
The bill proposed the president must be
approved by the House of Representatives and
the president
(Principle of checks and balances)
3 Article 20 Paragraph (3):
If the bill was not approved by the joint, the
bill was not be filed again in the House of
Representatives hearing that period.
Article 20 (3):
If the bill is not approved by Parliament the
draft law can not be proposed again in the
House of Representatives hearing that period.
4 Article 20 (4):
President passed a bill that has been agreed
upon to become law.
Article 20 Paragraph (4): change the sentence:
President as head of government endorsed
the draft law approved by the House of
Representatives no later than thirty days for
promulgation.
5 Article 20 Paragraph (5):
In terms of the draft legislation mutually
agreed upon is not signed by the President
within thirty days of the draft law has been
approved, the bill becomes law valid and
mandatory promulgation.
Article 20 (5):
If in time not later than thirty days the
President did not endorse the bill and not be
returned to the House of Representatives, the
bill is legitimate and enacted
(Already qualified material)
6 Addendum: Article 20 (6):
If within no later than thirty days the
President did not endorse the bill and
returned to the House of Representatives
along with the reasons for the objection, the
Parliament discussed the return of the bill.
7 Addendum: Article 20 (7):
Draft Law U ndang are returned to the
House of Representatives discussed at the
latest within thirty days since received the
Parliament must be discussed and approved a
minimum of 2/3 voices member House of
Representatives for approval by the
President.
8 Addendum: Article 20 (8):
as Article 20 (7) discussion back to the bill
made 1 time the plenary session, and if not
the approval of at least 2/3 of voices member
12. Page | 12
House of Representatives , the bill was
withdrawn.
9 Article 4 paragraph (1):
"The President of the Republic of Indonesia
holds the power of government according to
the Constitution"
Article 4 paragraph (1):
"The president came to power as the Head of
Government and Head of the Head of State in
accordance with the Constitution".
10 Special Article 22 paragraph (1):
"In matters of crunch that forced the
president reserves the right to apply for a
government regulation in lieu of law"
(PERPPU)
Article 22 paragraph (1):
"In matters of urgency that forces, the president
must establish a government regulation in lieu of
law"
11 Article 22 paragraph (2):
"Government Regulation it must be
approved by Parliament in the following
trial"
Paragraph (3):
"If not mendapt approval, government
regulations shall be revoked"
The choices: Article 22 paragraph (2),
Government regulations must be approved
by Parliament .
paragraph (3), deleted / removed.
(Principle of supervision and balance)
Paragraph (3) in the revision:
if not the approval of at least 2/3 vote and no
member of Parliament attended by 50 + 1
number of members of Parliament in the
House of Representatives plenary session
one , then the government regulations were
revoked.
fourth ; NRI Constitution of 1945 does not explicitly say when the President exercise its
authority as head of state and when the President exercise its authority as head of
government. NRI 1945 Constitution only mentions the results of the fourth amendment to the
President as the Head of Government, as contained in Article 4 paragraph (1): "President holds
the powers of government according to the constitution".
fifth ; The President in his authority as head of state can be lifted ambassadors and consuls. That
is, on the other Articles of the House fairly will provide advice only, not the authority to decide /
approve of state officials / public officers under the authority of the president.
CONCLUSION:
This paper concludes: (1) Veto President ineffective when examined in the constitutional
documents NRI Constitution of 1945; (2) There was inconsistent on the Indonesian government
system that is loaded with Presidential articles of the Constitution NRI 1945; (3) the lack of
courage of state institutions (legislative, and judicial eksektuif) konstitusonal to restore the rights
of Parliament, the President and the Judiciary in the Constitution NRI 1945; (4) recommended
some changes (if required no amendment) NRI in the Constitution of 1945 and Law No. 12 of
2011 to be followed by the MPR ( ex- officio member DPR and DPD) and the President; (5)
Presidential Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perppu), according to the authors should absolutely be
given to the President without the intervention of the House for the President as Head of State
and has the power Government Top under the Constitution NRI 1945 (the substance of a
presidential veto) and restore the rights of the constitutional president fully in Law OF as a basis
to consider prinsisp checks and balances between state institutions.
13. Page | 13
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Akbar, Patrialis (2013) Relationship With the presidential institution, the House of
Representatives Dan Veto Presediden. Jakarta: Total Media
Asshiddiqie, Jimly (2010). Constitutions and Constitutionalism Indonesia . Jakarta: Sinar
Grafika.
Asshiddiqie Jimly , ( 2010 ). Constitutions and Constitutionalism Indonesia , Sinar Grafika,
East Jakarta, p. 170.
Asshiddiqie Jimly , ( 2010). Constitutions and Constitutionalism Indonesia , Sinar Grafika, East
Jakarta, p. 173.
Asshiddiqie Jimly , (2007). Law of the State of Emergency, Sinar Grafika, East Jakarta, pp 52-
54.
Asshiddiqie Jimly , ( 2006) . Prihal Act , ......., p. 305.
People's Consultative Assembly (2004). Book I: Comprehensive Study of Academic Paper
Constitutional Commission on the Amendment of the Constitution of the Republic of
Indonesia 1945 , Jakarta: MPR.
Marzuki, Laica (2010 Constitution and Constitutionalism . Journal Constitution, Vol. 7, No. 4.
Yuda, Hanta (2010). Half Heart presidentialism . Jakarta: PT Gramedia Utama Pusaka.
Legislation
Article 5 (1) Constitution NRI 1945.
Article 5 (2) Constitution NRI 1945
Article 22 paragraph (1) Constitution NRI 1945.
Article 20 of the Constitution NRI 1945.
U ndang Law Number 12 Year 2011
Internet
http://www.KamusBahasaIndonesia.org d iakses October 10th 2017 21:33 hours local time).
(http: // www.merdeka.com accessed October 10, 2017 hours 21:33 pm)
(republica.com_Rabu, accessed October 15, 2014, 14:00 pm).
