Pasal 35 Ayat (1) Undang – undang No 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi berbunyi Pemohon dapat menarik kembali permohonan sebelum atau selama pemeriksaan Mahkamah Konstitusi dilakukan. Pasal tersebut diatas dengan tegas menyebutkan bahwa Pemohon mempunyai hak untuk mencabut Permohonannnya. Akan tetapi pada perkara No : 02-11-08-16/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XII/2014) Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam putusannya tetap memasukkan perkara aquo dalam putusannya, walapupun terdapat adanya pencabutan Permohonan Pemohon yang terdaftar dalam register kepaniteraan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Setelah adanya pencabutan maka tidak ada lagi persidangan selanjutnya terkait sengketa perselisihan hasil pemilihan umum Anggota DPRD Kabupaten Sumenep dapil 5 antara Partai Amanat Nasional (PAN) selaku Pemohon dengan KPU selaku Termohon. Bahkan MK mengabulkan permohonan pemohon untuk seluruhnya. Mengingat sifat putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi adalah Final dan Mengikat. Oleh karena itu perlu dilakukan kajian bagaimana kedudukan hukum putusan MK yang melanggar hukum acara serta apakah ada perlindungan hukum terhaddap putusan tersebut bagi pihak yang dirugikan? Dari penelitian hukum normatif yang dilakukan dengan metode pendekatan perundang – undangan dan pendekatan konseptual, bahwa Putusan tersebut adalah cacat hukum sehingga putusan tersebut batal demi hukum. Perlindungan hukum terhadap pihak yang dirugikan atas putusan tersebut adalah Constitutional Complaint atau pengaduan konstitusional.

Article 35 Paragraph (1) of Law No. 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court reads that the Applicant may withdraw the application before or during the examination of the Constitutional Court. The article above clearly states that the Applicant has the right to revoke his Application. However, in case No: 02-11-08-16 / PHPU.DPR-DPRD / XII / 2014) the Constitutional Court in its decision still included aquo cases in its verdicts, even though there was a revocation of the Petitioners' Application registered in the registrar's registrar of the Constitutional Court. After the revocation, there wash no further trial related to the dispute over the results of the election results of Sumenep Regency DPRD members in electoral area between the National Mandate Party (PAN) as the Petitioner and the KPU as the Respondent. Even the Constitutional Court granted the request of the applicant in its entirety. Given the nature of the decision of the Constitutional Court is Final and Binding. Therefore it is necessary to study how the legal position of the Constitutional Court's decision violates the procedural law and whether the reis legal protection against the decision for the injured party? From normative legal research carried out by the method of legislative approach and conceptual approach, that decision is a legal flaw so that the decision is null and void by law. Legal protection against parties who have been harmed by the decisionis Constitutional Complaint.

Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal Baca Jurnal