Penambahan Kewenangan Constitutional Question di Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagai Upaya untuk Melindungi Hak-Hak Konstitusional Warga Negara

Penyempurnaan sistem hukum dan konstitusi merupakan prasyarat untuk membangun negara demokrasi konstitusional di Indonesia. Dalam cabang kekuasan kehakiman, salah satu upaya untuk mencapai hal tersebut terkait dengan adanya gagasan pembentukan mekanisme pertanyaan konstitusional (constitusional question). Istilah constitutional question merujuk pada suatu mekanisme pengujian konstitusionalitas di Mahkamah Konstitusi yang diajukan oleh seorang hakim di pengadilan umum yang merasa ragu-ragu terhadap konstitusionalitas suatu undang-undang yang digunakan dalam perkara yang sedang ditanganinya. Artikel ini membahas mengenai kemungkinan dibangunnya mekanisme constitutional question di Indonesia dengan alternatif implementasinya. Metodologi yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini berupa yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan kualitatif dan menggunakan bahan kepustakaan. Dari hasil penelitian ini disimpulkan bahwa terdapat urgensi untuk menambahkan kewenangan constitutional question kepada Mahkamah Konstitusi. Dengan adanya mekanisme tersebut, putusan hakim di pengadilan umum yang dinilai bertentangan dengan konstitusi dan dianggap melanggar hak konstitusional warga negara dapat dihindari. Kemudian, objek dan ruang pengujian terhadap peraturan perundangundangan menjadi semakin luas dan pelanggaran hak konstitusional terhadap warga negara dapat dipulihkan. Apabila constitutional question akan diterapkan di Indonesia, maka dasar kewenangan constitutional question sebaiknya diatur melalui perubahan konstitusi. Namun, hal tersebut dapat juga dilakukan dengan merevisi Undang-Undang Mahkamah Konstitusi, penafsiran konstitusi yang dituangkan di dalam putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi, ataupun perluasan legal standing untuk lembaga pengadilan sebagai salah satu pemohon constitutional review. Selain itu, perlu juga diatur mengenai kualifikasi pemohon constitutional question dan pembatasan waktu penanganan perkaranya oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi.Improving the legal and constitutional system is a prerequisite for building a constitutional democratic state in Indonesia. In a constitutional adjudication system, one of the efforts to achieve that goal is related to an idea to establish a constitutional question mechanism. The term of constitutional question refers to a mechanism for examining the constitutionality of a law in the Constitutional Court lodged by an ordinary judge who has a doubt regarding the constitutionality of the law applied in the case that is being handled by him/her. This article discusses the possibility of establishing a constitutional question mechanism in Indonesia with its alternative implementations. The methodology used in this research was normative juridical writing with qualitative approach and library research. The research results found the urgency for expanding the authority of constitutional question to the Constitutional Court. With the existence of such mechanism, ordinary court decisions that are contrary to the constitution and violate the constitutional rights of the citizens can be avoided. Moreover, the scope of constitutional review of the legislation becomes expansive and constitutional rights violations can be recovered. If the constitutional question will be applied in Indonesia, the basis of the authority of constitutional question should be regulated through a constitutional amendment. However, it can be applied also by revising the Constitutional Court Law, the constitutional interpretation set forth in the Constitutional Court decision or the extension of legal standing for ordinary courts as one of the applicants for constitutional review. In addition, it is necessary to regulate the applicant’s qualification of constitutional question and time limitation for handling constitutional question cases by the Constitutional Court

Implementasi Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2016 pada Putusan Hakim dalam Pemberian Perlindungan Hukum bagi Pembeli Beritikad Baik

Dalam melindungi pihak yang beritikad baik dalam suatu perjanjian maka dibutuhkan peraturan yang dapat memberikan kepastian hukum. Pada tahun 2016 Mahkamah Agung melakukan rapat pleno dan menerbitkan Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung (SEMA) Nomor 4 Tahun 2016, yang memberikan rumusan mengenai kriteria pembeli yang beritikad baik dalam pembelian tanah. Dalam penelitian ini mengkaji mengenai pertama, implementаsi Surаt Edаrаn Mаhkаmаh Аgung Nomor 4 Tаhun 2016 dаlаm putusаn-putusаn pengаdilаn. Kedua, pertimbаngаn hаkim dаlаm memutus perkаrа berkаitаn dengаn pembeli beritikаd bаik sudаh sesuаi dengаn perаturаn yаng berlаku. Jenis penelitian ini adalah penelitian normatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa pаdа prаktiknyа sepаnjаng putusаn yаng dikeluаrkаn setelаh terbitnyа SEMА Nomor 4 Tаhun 2016, dаlаm menggunаkаn SEMА sebаgаi dаsаr pertimbаngаn untuk menentukаn kriteriа pembeli beritikаd bаik, hаkim telаh melаkukаn sesuаi petunjuk yаng terterа dаlаm SEMА. Dаri kаsus-kаsus yang sudah diteliti, sаtu diаntаrаnyа telаh mendаsаrkаn pаdа SEMА No. 4 Tаhun 2016, lаlu putusаn yаng keduа mendаsаri pаdа SEMА yаng terbit sebelum SEMА No. 4 Tаhun 2016, dаn putusаn hаkim yаng ketigа tidаk menimbаng berdаsаrkаn SEMА. Sehinggа, pemberlаkuаn SEMА Nomor 4 Tаhun 2016 mаsih belum diikuti oleh pаrа hаkim, sebаgаi pedomаn dаlаm penаngаn perkаrа mengenаi juаl beli tаnаh yаng terjаdi setаlаh dikeluаrkаnnyа SEMА Nomor 4 Tаhun 2016.In protecting parties with good faith inside an agreement, regulations that provide legal certainty are needed. In 2016 the Supreme Court conducted a plenary meeting and issued a Letter of the Supreme Court (SEMA) Number 4 Year 2016, which provided the criteria of buyers with good intentions in purchasing land. In this study, we examine two things. The first is, the implementation of Letter of the Supreme Court (SEMA) Number 4 Year 2016 in court injunctions. The second, has the judge consideration followed applicable regulations in deciding the case related to buyer with good faith. The type of this study is normative study. The result of this study shows that practically the judge has followed the regulations in SEMA as the consideration material to determine the criteria of buyer with good intention since SEMA Number 4 Year 2016 was issued. From the cases examined, one of them took SEMA Number 4 Year 2016 into consideration, and then the second injunction took SEMA that issued before SEMA Number 4 Year 2016 into consideration, and the third injunction does not take SEMA into consideration. Thus, the enforcement of SEMA Number 4 Year 2016 is still not used by all the courts yet, as a consideration material in handling cases of land selling-purchasing since SEMA Number 4 Year 2016 issued

Bosnia-Herzegovina: The Role of the Judiciary in a Divided Society

This paper analyzes the role of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina for the promotion of social justice under the conditions of a triple transformation from war to peace and from a communist regime based on the Titoist self-management ideology to a liberal-democratic political regime and economic market system in three parts. The first section describes the political, constitutional and economic context during and after the collapse of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The second section describes and analyzes the constitutional and institutional arrangements established under the General Framework Agreement for Peace, concluded in Dayton/Ohio and Paris, 1995. The third section deals with the role of the Constitutional Court and analyzes with reference to its case law the interpretative doctrines developed in its adjudication of the right to property concerning different concepts of property and the right to work in the context of the constitutionally guaranteed right to return of refugees and restitution of property

Constitutional Change: Towards Better Human Rights Protection in Australia

Many legal scholars contend that Australia does not have a charter of rights in its Constitution. The legal scholar Rosalind Dixon, however, suggests that the Constitution does include some provisions that could be viewed as resembling a (partial) bill of rights. This constitutional framework might cause one to ponder whether human rights are adequately protected in the Australian constitutional system. This paper attempts to consider this question. It is argued that the protection of human rights under the Constitution, federal and state laws is not fully capable of responding to at least three human rights crises presented. Accordingly, the paper suggests that Australia should consider the idea of amending the Constitution in order to better human rights protection in the country. It offers suggestion that the Canadian model protection of human rights could be considered as one of the primary sources for reforms in the future

A Comparative Perspective on Constitutional Complaint: Discussing Models, Procedures, and Decisions

The constitutional complaint is one of the important constitutional court jurisdictions that can be described as a complaint or lawsuit filed by any person who deems his or her rights has been violating by act or omission of public authority. Currently, the constitutional court in many countries have adopted a constitutional complaint system in a variety of models. However, the first application of the constitutional complaint jurisdiction came from Europe. In Austria, the constitutional complaint is allowed against the administrative actions but not against the court decisions. While Germany and Spain have a similar model that is a complaint against an act of the public authority including court decisions. In Asia, it is imperative that the court in Asia actively participate in the Association of Asian Constitutional Courts and Equivalent Institutions (AACC). The AACC members have adopted a system of constitutional adjudication in a variety of models, and when it comes to jurisdictions, out of sixteen AACC members, there are four countries (Azerbaijan, South Korea, Thailand, and Turkey) have the constitutional complaint in their jurisdictions. In Azerbaijan, constitutional complaint is comparatively broad. Azerbaijan’s Constitutional Court can handle constitutional complaint against the normative legal act of the legislative and executive, an act of a municipality and the decisions of courts. In contrast, even though constitutional complaint in South Korea and Thailand can be against the exercise and non-exercise of state power, constitutional complaint cannot be filed against court decisions. In Turkey, the constitutional complaint mechanism is coupled with the regional system of human rights protection. The Turkish Constitutional Court handles complaints from individuals concerning violations of human rights and freedoms falling under the joint protection of the Turkish Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). This paper argues that constitutional complaint represents the main part of the constitutional court, and through a comparative perspective among three countries in Europe and four AACC members are expected to provide lessons for the other AACC members that do not have a constitutional complaint mechanism, such as Indonesia

Respons Konstitusional Larangan Calon Anggota Dewan Perwakilan Daerah sebagai Pengurus Partai Politik

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) Nomor 30/PUU-XVI/2018 bertanggal 23 Juli 2018 menjadi salah satu putusan penting bagi desain lembaga perwakilan di Indonesia. Dalam Putusan tersebut, MK menyatakan bahwa pengurus partai politik dilarang menjadi calon anggota Dewan Perwakilan Daerah. Namun, tindak lanjut dari Putusan ini memicu polemik ketatanegaraan. Sebab, terjadi kontradiksi mengenai waktu pemberlakuan larangan tersebut akibat adanya perbedaan pemaknaan terhadap Putusan MK di dalam Putusan MA, PTUN, dan Bawaslu. MK menyatakan bahwa Putusannya berlaku sejak Pemilu 2019. Akan tetapi, Putusan MA, PTUN, dan Bawaslu tersebut menyatakan larangan tersebut berlaku setelah Pemilu 2019. Artikel ini mengkaji kontradiksi Putusan-Putusan tersebut dengan menggunakan tiga pisau analisis, yaitu: (1) finalitas putusan; (2) respons terhadap putusan; dan (3) validitas atau keberlakuan norma. Dengan menggunakan doktrin responsivitas terhadap putusan pengadilan dari Tom Ginsburg, artikel ini menyimpulkan bahwa Keputusan KPU yang tetap kukuh memberlakukan larangan bagi pengurus partai politik sebagai calon anggota DPD sejak Pemilu tahun 2019 sesungguhnya merupakan tindakan formal konstitusional karena telah mengikuti (comply) penafsiran konstitusional yang terkandung dalam Putusan MK. Di lain sisi, tindakan KPU juga merupakan bentuk yang sekaligus mengesampingkan (overrule) Putusan MA, PTUN, dan Bawaslu. Meskipun demikian, respons KPU tersebut dapat dibenarkan karena Putusan MK memiliki objek dan dasar pengujian lebih tinggi dalam hierarki peraturan perundang-undangan, sehingga memiliki validitas hukum lebih tinggi dari Putusan MA, PTUN, dan Bawaslu. Dengan demikian, tindakan KPU yang konsisten mengikuti Putusan MK tersebut merupakan respons konstitusional yang memiliki justifikasi hukum dan konstitusi, sebagaimana juga dikuatkan oleh Dewan Kehormatan Penyelenggara Pemilu (DKPP), baik secara hukum maupun etik.The Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 30/PUU-XVI/2018 on 23 July 2018 is one of the important decisions concerning the constitutional design of parliament in Indonesia. The Constitutional Court decided that political party officials and functionaries are banned from running as the Regional Representative Council candidates. Nonetheless, the implementation of the decision has triggered a political polemic because there is a contradiction concerning the timing of the prohibition due to different interpretations towards the Constitutional Court Decision in the Supreme Court Decision Number 64/P/HUM/2018, the Administrative Court Decision Number 242/G/SPPU/2018/PTUN-JKT and the Election Supervisory Body Decision Number 008/LP/PL/ADM/RI/00/XII/2018. The Constitutional Court explicitly stated that its decision must be implemented since the 2019 General Election. However, the Supreme Court Decision, the Administrative Court Decision, and the Election Supervisory Body Decision decided that the prohibition shall be applied after the 2019 General Election. This article examines the contradictions between those decisions using three different approaches, namely: (1) finality of decision; (2) response to decision; and (3) validity or the applicability of norms. Based on the responsivity doctrine to the court decisions introduced by Tom Ginsburg, this article concludes that the General Election Commission decision that strongly holds its standing to ban political party officials and functionaries from running as the Regional Representative Council candidates since the 2019 General Election is a formally constitutional decision because it has complied with the constitutional interpretation contained in the Constitutional Court Decision. On the other hand, the General Election Commission decision has also overruled the Supreme Court Decision, the Administrative Court Decision, and the Election Supervisory Body Decision. Nevertheless, the General Election Commission’s response is appropriate because the Constitutional Court Decision has an object and a constitutional ground of judicial review that are higher in the hierarchy of laws and regulations in Indonesia. Therefore, the validity and the legal effect of the Constitutional Court Decision are also higher compared to the Supreme Court Decision, the Administrative Court Decision, or the Election Supervisory Body Decision. Thus, the General Election Commission decision that consistently complied with the Constitutional Court decision is a constitutional response that can be justified

Pengaruh Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi di Bidang Pengujian Undang-Undang terhadap Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia dengan Perubahan KUHAP

Sistem peradilan pidana melingkupi wilayah formulasi, aplikasi, dan eksekusi. Proses aplikasi dipengaruhi besar oleh formulasi hukum acara pidana yang dikodifikasi ke dalam KUHAP. Sejak MK berdiri dengan kewenangan menguji Undang-Undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar, KUHAP telah diuji beberapa kali di Mahkamah Konstitusi. Artikel ini memiliki tujuan untuk menelusuri, mengkaji, dan menjelaskan berbagai putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi di bidang pengujian undang-undang yang berpengaruh terhadap perkembangan hukum pidana formil di Indonesia. Artikel ini disusun atas hasil penelitian hukum normatif yang menggunakan data sekunder berupa bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder dan bahan hukum tersier. Cara pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan penelitian kepustakaan, sedangkan alat pengumpulan data menggunakan studi dokumen. Analisis data dilakukan secara kualitatif dengan pemaparan secara deskriptif analitis. Artikel ini memberikan dua kesimpulan. Pertama, penelusuran Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang dilakukan sejak tahun 2003 sampai dengan 2018 menunjukkan bahwa terdapat 32 (tiga puluh dua) permohonan uji materi terhadap hukum pidana formil. Namun demikian, hanya terdapat 13 (tiga belas) permohonan uji materi terhadap hukum pidana formil yang dikabulkan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi berkaitan dengan KUHAP. Kedua, terhadap beberapa putusan MK, Mahkamah Agung membuat Perma atau SEMA untuk menyimpangi putusan MK tersebut. The article aims to examine all relevant constitutional court decisions which have impacts on criminal laws, especially in substantive, procedural, and penitentiary law. The article is based on a legal normative research employing secondary data, including primary legal sources, secondary legal sources, and tertiary legal sources. The method in collecting the data is library research. The research tools are documentary studies. The analysis is qualitative which is strengthened by descriptive analysis. There are two conclusive statements of this research. Firstly, the finding on constitutional court decisions showed that 32 (thirty-two) decisions were made for procedural criminal law, but only 13 (thirteen) decisions were in line with the applicants’ objectives which are mainly related to Criminal Procedural Code (KUHAP). Secondly, Supreme Court produced Perma or SEMA which overruled the Constitutional Court decisions.  

Keterkaitan Kerahasiaan Bank dan Pajak: Antara Kepentingan Negara dan Pribadi

Bank sebagai lembaga keuangan, eksistensinya sangat tergantung dari kepercayaan masyarakat yang menjadi nasabahnya. Masyarakat telah memercayai bank sebagai institusi yang menyimpan dana nasabah, mengelola dan menyalurkan kembali kepada masyarakat dalam bentuk pinjaman atau kredit. Oleh karena itu, untuk menjaga kepercayaan nasabah tersebut, bank harus mematuhi ketentuan mengenai rahasia bank. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah mengetahui dalam kondisi bagaimana rahasia bank dapat diakses, pihak-pihak mana yang wajib menjaga kerahasiaan bank, adakah keterkaitan kerahasiaan bank dengan pajak, dan perlukah kerahasiaan bank yang terkait pajak dihilangkan. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian deskriptif kualitatif. Hasil penelitian mengungkapkan bahwa terdapat beberapa kondisi dimana rahasia bank boleh dibuka, tetapi tidak semua informasi dan data keuangan nasabah boleh dibuka di hadapan publik kecuali setelah adanya persetujuan dari Otoritas Pajak dan setelah mendapat laporan dari lembaga jasa keuangan di bawah pengawasan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan. Pembukaan rahasia bank diperbolehkan apabila berhubungan dengan kepentingan negara, seperti untuk kepentingan peningkatan kepatuhan masyarakat terhadap pembayaran pajak dan peningkatan penerimaan negara di sektor pajak.Banks as financial institutions, their existence is very dependent on the people’s trust who become their customers. The community has trusted banks as institutions that store customer funds, manage and channel back to the community in the form of loans or credits. Therefore, to maintain the customer's trust, the bank must obey bank secrets provisions. This research uses descriptive qualitative research method in the form of normative legal research and laws and regulations studies related to bank secrecy, derived from literature such as constitutional court decision, books, journals, articles, magazines, and websites. The results reveal that there are several conditions under which bank secrets may be opened, but not all financial information and data of the client may be disclosed in public unless after approval by the Tax Authority after receiving a report from a financial services institution under the supervision of the Financial Services Authority. The unveiling of bank secrecy is permitted when it comes to the interests of the state, such as for the purpose of increasing public compliance of tax payments and increasing state revenues in the tax sector.

Pembatasan Perubahan Bentuk Negara Kesatuan dalam Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 dalam Perspektif Constitution Making

Tulisan ini diarahkan untuk melihat tentang Pembatasan Perubahan atas Bentuk Negara Kesatuan Indonesia yang dituangkan dalam Pasal 37 Ayat (5) UUD 1945 sebagai bagian dari konsep pembentukan suatu konstitusi (constitution making) yang pada prosesnya tetap mempertahankan Bentuk Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia dan juga menetapkan sejak awal dalam Bab tentang Perubahan UUD 1945 dalam Pasal 5-nya untuk nantinya manakala ada perubahan haruslah mempertahankan Bentuk Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia. Hal ini tentu menjadi menarik jika dikaitkan dengan makna constitution making pembentukan konstitusi yang baik haruslah mempunyai tujuan salah satunya untuk semakin memperkuat persatuan nasional. Disisi tahapannya bahwa sebagai materi muatan perubahan UUD 1945, ternyata bahwa Bentuk Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia tetap dipertahankan dalam proses perubahan (agenda setting) melalui Kesepakatan Dasar dalam hal perubahan UUD 1945. Metodologi penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan sejarah hukum. Hasil penelitian dari tulisan ini dapat dilihat bahwa pembatasan perubahan bentuk NKRI terdapat tiga (3) aspek yang berkaitan dengan masalah tahapan atau proses perubahan UUD 1945 sebagai constitution making. Aspek pertama adalah bahwa pembatasan perubahan bentuk NKRI yang termuat dalam Kesepakatan Dasar adalah sebagai elemn-elemen atau hal yang dipertahankan dalam tahapan agenda setting. Aspek kedua adalah menjaga kontinuitas hukum dari bentuk NKRI yang sudah ada dalam UUD 1945 sebelum perubahan. Aspek ketiga adalah bahwa terhadap dampak atau konsekuensi hukumnya, bahwa Pasal 37 Ayat (5) UUD 1945 akan menempatkan bentuk NKRI sebagai elemen atau hal yang harus dimasukkan manakala ada perubahan UUD kelima tanpa harus melihat aspek kesejarahan sebagaimana dilakukan para perubahan pertama sampai keempat. Terakhir adalah bahwa dalam pandangan Yash Ghai, konsep pembatasan perubahan bentuk NKRI yang tertuang dalam Kesepakatan Dasar dan Pasal 37 Ayat (5) dapat dimaknai untuk menjaga dan mempertahankan persatuan nasional.This article attempts to analyse about restrictions to change the form of Unitary State of The Republic of Indonesia that explained in Article Number 37 Paragraph (5) 1945 Constitution of The Republic of Indonesia as part of the concept of constitution making, that in the process, the form of Unitary State of The Republic of Indonesia is still maintained. While in chapter about 1945 Constitution of The Republic of Indonesia changes Article 5 is stated that if there is changes, the form of Unitary State of The Republic of Indonesia has to be maintained. There is something interesting if it is associated with the meaning of constution making itself, that it should has a purpose to strengthen national unity. In fact, as content of constitution of 1945 Constitution of The Republic of Indonesia change, the form of Unitary State of The Republic of Indonesia is still maintained in agenda setting through basic agreement of 1945 Constitution of The Republic of Indonesia changes. Metodology ini this research used legasl research with historical approach perspective. In conclusion of this writings, stated that there is 3 aspects that related to the process of changes of 1945 Constitution of The Republic of Indonesia as the constitution making, in term of restrictions to change the form of Unitary State of The Republic of Indonesia. First, restrictions to change the form of Unitary State of The Republic of Indonesia that is implied in basic agreement act as elements that has to be maintained in process of agenda setting. Second, law continuity of form of Unitary State of The Republic of Indonesia has to be kept, as implied in 1945 Constitution of The Republic of Indonesia before amendment. Third, form of Unitary State of The Republic of Indonesia has to be included in fifth amendment as legal effect of Article 37 Paragraph (5) 1945 Constitution of The Republic of Indonesia without considering historical aspects as done in first to forth amendment. Lastly, in Yash Gai’s point of view, restrictions to change the form of Unitary State of The Republic of Indonesia concept that is implied in Basic Agreement and Article 37 Paragraph (5) can be interpreted to keep and to maintain national unity.

Konstitusionalitas Masa Tunggu Eksekusi bagi Terpidana Mati dalam Sistem Pemidanaan

Pasal 10 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana menempatkan pidana mati sebagai salah satu pidana pokok. Pidana mati secara filosofis berorientasi pembalasan dan general prevention. Namun penerapannya memperlihatkan inkonsistensi dalam sistem pemidanaan, diktum putusan pengadilan memvonis pidana mati, melainkan eksekusinya adalah pidana penjara seumur hidup. Praktik penerapan hukum demikian menimbulkan ketidakadilan dan ketidakpastian hukum. Urgensi penelitian ini adalah untuk mengkaji bagaimana konstitusionalitas kedudukan hukum masa tunggu eksekusi bagi terpidana mati dalam perspektif sistem pemidanaan? Untuk menjawab pernyataan penelitian, Peneliti menggunakan jenis penelitian yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan doctrinal legal research, maka hukum harus dipandang secara komprehensif seperti asas, norma dan meta norma. Konstitusionalitas masa tunggu eksekusi bagi terpidana mati tidak diatur dalam undang-undang, secara yuridis terdapat beberapa faktor untuk menunda eksekusi, di luar faktor-faktor tersebut penundaan eksekusi merupakan inskonstitusional. Ketidakpastian hukum terhadap masa tunggu eksekusi merupakan disharmonisasi antara hukum materil dan hukum formil dan berdampak tidak tercapainya deterrent effect, keadilan serta kemanfaatan hukum. Sehingga perlu pembaruan hukum pidana dengan salah satu metode evolutionary approach, global approach dan compromise approach sebagai pedoman eksekusi pidana mati.The article 10 of Criminal Code put death penalties as one of the principal crimes. Philosophically, the death penalty is meant to be retaliatory and general prevention. However, its application shows inconsistencies in the criminal system. Decision of the court is a death penalty, but the execution is a life imprisonment. The practice of implementing such laws creates injustice and legal uncertainty. The urgency of this research was to examine how constitutionality of execution waiting period for the death penalty in the punisment system perspective. To answer the research question, researcher used a type of normative juridical research with a doctrinal legal research approach, so, the law must be viewed comprehensively as principles, norms and meta norms. The constitutionality of the waiting period for the execution of convicted death is not regulated by law. Juridically, there were several factors delaying execution. Apart from these factors, the delaying in execution is unconstitutional. Legal uncertainty over the waiting period for execution is a disharmony between material law and formal law. That has an impact on not achieving deterrent effects, justice and the benefits of the law. Therefore, it is necessary to reform criminal law with one method of evolutionary approach, global approach and compromise approach as a guideline for execution of death penalty