Workplace Law Malpractice Plan – The draft work copyright law not only raises the debate about the substance, but also the question of how the designer ignores the process of drafting the law. If the structure of all the articles in the draft is traced, we will find a number of technical problems that should be obeyed in each formulation of the law.
This paper will technically compare how the formulation of the Work Copyright Bill uses the basis of the Law Formation of Laws and Regulations. There are at least four technical formulations that actually violate the law.
First, the title aspect. If you explore the contents of the draft, there are three types of regulations, namely forming new norms, changing norms and / or removing norms, and revoking laws. If the draft is intended to make a new law at all, the title “Employment Copyrights” does not matter. However, when most of the draft actually changes / removes norms in the law, the title becomes irrelevant. The provisions in the attachment to the Law on the Formation of Statutory Regulations explicitly state that the title of the amended law must contain the title of the amended law. Including the revocation of the law, the title of the revoked law must also be mentioned.
Workplace Law Malpractice Plan
Second, the consideration of the formation of the law should only contain philosophical, sociological and juridical considerations. However, in the draft, in consideration, a technical problem regarding the formation of the law emerged. It was stated that changes in sectoral laws are considered ineffective and inefficient, then a legal breakthrough was made through the omnibus law method.
From this formulation, the government mistakenly placed criticism of the technical changes in the law as a consideration in changing the laws governing substantive matters. If the government feels the process and technical changes to the law make it difficult, what should be changed first is the law governing the formation of legislation.
Third, the basic aspects of legal formation of laws. Although most of the substance of the draft contains changes to various laws, none of the laws that will be amended will serve as the legal basis. Normally, in every change, the law to be changed is made part of the legal basis.
Fourth, the structural aspects of the formulation of the law are systematically arranged in order, (i) general provisions, (ii) subject matter that is regulated, (iii) criminal provisions (if needed), (iv) transitional provisions (if needed), and ( v) closing provisions. In the draft, the systematic formulation cannot be used because it uses the omnibus law method, which changes many laws. Thus, the section or chapter “general provisions” that should be placed in the initial article or several articles cannot be applied because it is placed spread throughout the entire law according to the order in which the laws will be changed or deleted. The same thing then also affects other parts which are all spread and not structured systematically. Belanja Online
Violations of the technical regulations for the formulation of these laws and regulations clearly show violations committed by the government of the Law Formation of Regulations and their attachments, which constitute an integrated whole. The existence of an attachment as a technical part that explains the formulation of a regulation certainly aims not only to facilitate the drafting of the regulation, but also makes it easier for the public to read and understand the substance of a law.
The omnibus law method seems to be forced because the government and the House of Representatives base it on the interests of facilitating discussion for both parties, without considering the difficulties experienced by the community as the object of this regulation. The problem with the formation of a law that has been under the authority of the government and the DPR has not been improved. Even when this draft is finally discussed, how ready are the internal rules in the DPR to discuss this draft based on the stages in the discussion until the enactment of the law?
Thus, suspicion that this design will be discussed quickly and without meaningful debate becomes unavoidable. This can at least be seen from the attitude of the president who urged the DPR to immediately conduct discussions to political lobbies conducted by ministers and political party leaders to immediately discuss and finalize this draft.
It is at this point that the legislation malpractices occur. A law is drafted without regard to the stages and procedures set out in the law. Even the legislators arbitrarily make rules for amending laws that are contrary to the law. The discussion of this draft has not yet been carried out and there is still time for the government as a proposer to withdraw the draft and revise it in accordance with the technical guidelines established by law.