THE NATURE OF THE USE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES RIGHT TO INQUIRE AGAINST THE CORRUPTION ERADICATION COMMISSION IN THE INDONESIAN STATE ADMINISTRATION SYSTEM
This study aims: (1). analyse and explain the DPR's inquiry rights in the Indonesian constitutional system; (2). analyse and explain the use of the DPR's Inquiry Rights against the Corruption Eradication Committee as an instrument of supervision; (3). analyse and explain the institutional position of the KPK in the Indonesian state administration structure. This research was conducted using doctrinal, normative legal research methods or library legal research, namely legal research conducted by examining library materials or secondary data consisting of primary legal materials, secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials. These materials are arranged systematically and studied; then, a conclusion is drawn in relation to the problem under study. The results of this study: (1). The DPR's Inquiry Rights, functions and authorities are regulated in Article 20A of the 1945 Constitution that, in carrying out its functions, in addition to the rights regulated in other articles of this Constitution, the DPR has the right of interpellation, the right of inquiry, and the right to express opinions, the authors conclude that the DPR after the amendment to the KPK law, the DPR can exercise the right of inquiry against the KPK; (2). The Use of the DPR's Inquiry Right Against the Corruption Eradication Commission is an instrument of DPR supervision over the KPK which implements the law as a state institution, but not in the law enforcement process as research results show that even though the KPK has been emphasized in the law as an institution that belongs to the executive family, this does not mean that it can be questioned by the KPK. DPR without having a fundamental reason; (3). The position of the KPK is a state institution that is independent; on the other hand, based on the Constitutional Court Decision No. 36/PUU-XV/2017 that the KPK is part of the executive power family. Based on this decision, Law No. 30 of 2002 was revised into Law no. 19 of 2019 concerning the KPK. In the changes to the KPK Law, the KPK is positioned as an executive power institution. Suggestions for this research: (1). The urgency of improving the regulatory framework regarding the framework for implementing the DPR's inquiry rights in the Indonesian constitutional system so that the DPR in exercising its inquiry rights to an independent state institution does not touch authority that could undermine the independence of an institution; (2). The need to re-arrange the DPR's Inquiry Rights, one of which is the merger of laws related to the DPR's inquiry rights to minimise clashes with inquiry norms, given the many state institutions that have sprung up, which aim to maximise deficiencies and become a constitutional need for Indonesia; (3). The importance of restructuring and revitalising the commissions of independent state institutions, in this case, one of which is the Corruption Eradication Committee, among others, is to make it a constitutional organ through the 5th Amendment to the 1945 Constitution. Ideally, all independent state commissions are strictly regulated in the constitution, including regarding institutional status.
Use of Inquiry Right, DPR, KPK, Indonesian State Administration