Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorMarlina
dc.contributor.advisorNingsih, Suria
dc.contributor.authorArrasyid, Muhammad Hanafie
dc.date.accessioned2025-10-01T01:47:06Z
dc.date.available2025-10-01T01:47:06Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositori.usu.ac.id/handle/123456789/108847
dc.description.abstractThe immunity rights of legislative members constitute one of the important pillars in a democratic system aimed at protecting the independence of people's representative institutions in carrying out legislative, supervisory, and budgetary functions without intimidation or pressure from any party. The formulation of problems in this research are: 1) How is the regulation of DPRD members' immunity rights in Indonesia's legal system or hierarchy, 2) How do Indonesia's legal criteria determine the boundaries between criticism and defamation against regional heads (based on defamation offenses), and 3) What are the judge's considerations in assessing the use of DPRD members' immunity rights regarding criticism of regional heads' official trips based on Supreme Court Decision Number 395 K/Pid/2021. The method used in this writing is normative juridical research method, which is a method that refers to legal norms conducted through library studies related to the problems being researched, this research has a descriptive nature, and the data is analyzed qualitatively. The research findings reveal that although immunity rights are guaranteed hierarchically from the 1945 Constitution to regional regulations, such protection has firm limitations and is not absolute in nature. Constitutional Court Decision No. 76/PUU-XII/2014 has clarified that immunity only applies to functional aspects directly related to legislative duties, not to common criminal acts, while the criteria for distinguishing between legitimate criticism and defamation are based on good faith, factual basis, public interest, and proper manner of delivery. Specifically, Supreme Court Decision No. 395 K/Pid/2021 in the Sony Hendra Ratissa case affirms that immunity rights do not protect DPRD members who express criticism outside official forums in an improper and dignity-degrading manner, despite the factual basis of their criticism, thus legislative members must still use formal mechanisms and maintain ethics in expressing opinions to obtain legitimate legal protection.en_US
dc.language.isoiden_US
dc.publisherUniversitas Sumatera Utaraen_US
dc.subjectImmunity Rightsen_US
dc.subjectDPRD Membersen_US
dc.subjectExpression of Opinionen_US
dc.titleUrgensi Aturan Penggunaan Hak Imunitas Anggota DPRD dalam Penyampaian Pendapaten_US
dc.title.alternativeThe Urgency of Regulating the Use of Immunity Rights of DPRD Members in Expressing Opinionsen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.identifier.nimNIM237005032
dc.identifier.nidnNIDN0007037501
dc.identifier.nidnNIDN0014026004
dc.identifier.kodeprodiKODEPRODI74101#Ilmu Hukum
dc.description.pages117 Pagesen_US
dc.description.typeTesis Magisteren_US
dc.subject.sdgsSDGs 16. Peace, Justice And Strong Institutionsen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record