Analysis of the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 36/PUU-XV/2017 Regarding the Right of Inquiry According to the Perspective of Islamic Law

Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 36 / PUU-XV/2017 Tentang Hak Angket Menurut Prespektif Hukum Islam

Abstract

The decision of the Constitutional Court Number 36/PUU-XV/2017 regarding the right to inquiry has drawn protests from the public, starting with the House of Representatives (DPR) issuing the right of inquiry to the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), the debate about the validity of the right of inquiry and the occurrence of dissenting opinions from judges. MK. The purpose of this study is to explain and analyze the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 36/PUU/XV-2017 regarding the right of inquiry related to the reasons why the Constitutional Court judges issued decisions in the perspective of al-maṣlaḥah al-mursalah. This research is a literature research (library research) which is descriptive-analytical. The results of this study are the occurrence of dissenting opinions of the judges, 5 judges rejected the lawsuit of judicial review and 4 judges accepted the lawsuit of judicial review of the plaintiffs. The Constitutional Court judges who agreed with the reason that the right of inquiry was to keep the KPK not only strong in carrying out its main functions, paying attention to all legal provisions, human rights and applying the principles of transparency and correct accountability in governance, including related to the use of the budget. Second, the Constitutional Court's decision Number 36/PUU-XV/2017 sees the reason that the Constitutional Court judges who agree with the right of inquiry are more beneficial than harmful and do not conflict with the concept of al-maṣlaḥah al-mursalah.