
Jurisdiction of Indonesian judiciary still leaves various polemics, one of which relates to decisions that are antinomian between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. This research aims to describe efforts to resolve these issues through reformulation within the constitution, regarding the supervisory authority of the Judicial Commission in creating harmonization of judicial decisions in the future. This type of research is normative research. The results indicate that reformulation or redefinition of the authority of the Judicial Commission in the constitution is a gateway to optimizing the role of the Judicial Commission as a product of reform in supervising judges in issuing correct, fair, and legal certainty decisions. Regulation through the constitution is an attributive authority in which the formulation of constitutional norms in the chapter on judicial power, particularly Article of the Judicial Commission, should preferably include phrases of "safeguarding" and "upholding" the code of ethics and conduct of judges, as preventive and repressive measures to prevent antinomian decisions between two judicial state institutions from recurring.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
