Lalu Nugraha Adi Utama, Rodliyah, Lalu Sabardi

Abstract:

This study aims to examine and analyze the considerations of Constitutional Court Judges in the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 46 / PUU-XIV / 2016 concerning Single and LGBT Courts. This research is a type of normative research (Normative Legal Research), with the approach used is the Statute Approach and the conceptual approach.

The results of this study are: 1). That the decision of MK No. 46 / PUU-IX / 2016 concerning Expansion of Zina and LGBT Meanings rejected due to testing of lawsuit material related to article 284 paragraph 1,2,3,4 and 5 related to Zina (adultery), Article 285 related to Rape and Article 292 related to sexual harassment are not contradictory with the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945 so that it was deemed necessary to make new regulations on this matter so that there were clear arrangements. With no regulation regarding the expansion of the meaning of Zina (adultery) and LGBT, there have been several acts of criminalization of the community against single adulterers and LGBT due to the vacuum of norms. 2). The judge’s basic consideration in deciding is that the Constitutional Court’s authority is not valid to form a law, that is entirely the authority of the legislator through its criminal policy which is part of the politics of criminal law. Therefore, the reform ideas offered by the Petitioners must be submitted to the legislators and this must be an important input for the legislators in the process of completing the new Criminal Code formulation.

Keywords: juridical analysis, Zina, LGBT

Full Text: PDF