Pustaka Ilmiah Universitas Padjadjaran

Abstrak

Jurnal Konstitusi

After the amendments of Indonesia’s Constitution of 1945, complication problem in Indonesia’s representative system has occurred. This paper aim to show that the representation system in Indonesia after the Amendments of Constitution of 1945 does not adopt unicameral or bicameral system. In the normative sense, the present representative system has put DPD only as a complement to DPR, both in the functions of legislation making and controlling. Although the DPD has more legitimacy than DPR because the DPD election process requirements are heavier than DPR, the functions of DPD consider not being equal to the legitimacy that they have. In practical sense, all the legislations were suggested by DPD and the result of control function of DPD are only used as recommendation by the DPR, and it was no follow up. This paper offered a strong bicameral system (symmetrical-incongruent) as an alternative model for Indonesia’s representative system. With this model, MPR positioned as representative body, which consists of two chambers. The fi rst chamber is DPR and second chamber is DPD. Both have equal (symmetrical) powers in legislation making and controlling. The reason is because; presents election process of DPR and DPD members have refl ected strong bicameral system. The indication for this is that both DPR and DPD have its own election process, which is different from one to another (incongruent). The consequences for choosing strong bicameral system are: all the powers of representative body are transferred to MPR; and to execute equal powers sharing effectively between DPD and DPR, the membership of DPR must refl ect the existence political patterns. This can be only happen if the election system applied district system and dual party system.