Asas Pemisahan Horizontal: Sebuah Tinjauan Komparatif antara Sistem Hukum Indonesia dan Sistem Hukum Barat
The concept of horizontal separation, or Asas Pemisahan Horizontal, is a fundamental principle in the legal systems of many countries. It refers to the division of powers among different branches of government, ensuring that no single entity holds absolute authority. This article will provide a comparative review of the implementation of this principle in the Indonesian and Western legal systems. <br/ > <br/ >#### The Principle of Horizontal Separation in the Indonesian Legal System <br/ > <br/ >In the Indonesian legal system, the principle of Asas Pemisahan Horizontal is embodied in the 1945 Constitution. The Constitution divides the government into three branches: the executive, legislative, and judiciary. Each branch operates independently, yet they are interrelated and check each other to prevent the abuse of power. The executive branch is responsible for implementing laws, the legislative branch for making laws, and the judiciary branch for interpreting laws. <br/ > <br/ >The Indonesian legal system also recognizes the principle of checks and balances. This principle ensures that each branch of government can limit the powers of the other branches. For instance, the legislative branch can reject the laws proposed by the executive branch, and the judiciary branch can declare laws unconstitutional. <br/ > <br/ >#### The Principle of Horizontal Separation in the Western Legal System <br/ > <br/ >In contrast, the Western legal system, particularly the United States, has a more rigid implementation of the principle of horizontal separation. The U.S. Constitution clearly defines the powers and responsibilities of each branch of government. The executive branch, headed by the President, is responsible for enforcing laws. The legislative branch, consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives, is responsible for creating laws. The judiciary branch, led by the Supreme Court, is responsible for interpreting laws. <br/ > <br/ >The checks and balances system in the U.S. is also more explicit. Each branch has specific powers to check the other branches. For example, the President can veto laws passed by Congress, but Congress can override the veto with a two-thirds majority vote. The Supreme Court can declare laws unconstitutional, effectively nullifying them. <br/ > <br/ >#### Comparative Analysis: Indonesian and Western Legal Systems <br/ > <br/ >Comparatively, both the Indonesian and Western legal systems uphold the principle of horizontal separation, but they differ in their implementation. The Indonesian system is more flexible, allowing for a certain degree of overlap among the branches of government. This flexibility can be advantageous as it allows for more collaboration and cooperation among the branches. However, it can also lead to ambiguity and potential conflicts of interest. <br/ > <br/ >On the other hand, the Western system, particularly the U.S., is more rigid and clear-cut. Each branch has clearly defined powers and responsibilities, and the checks and balances system is explicitly outlined. This rigidity ensures clarity and accountability but can also lead to gridlock and inefficiency, especially when there is a political impasse. <br/ > <br/ >In conclusion, the principle of Asas Pemisahan Horizontal plays a crucial role in both the Indonesian and Western legal systems. While their implementations differ, both systems aim to prevent the concentration of power in one entity and ensure a balanced and democratic governance. Understanding these differences can provide valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of each system and inform efforts to improve legal systems worldwide.