ECONOMIC ANALYSIS AND CRITERIA FOR LAW

In the 18th century Adam Smith presented a philosophical foundation for explaining the relationship between law and economics. The discipline arose partly out of a critique of trade unions and U.S. antitrust law. The most influential proponents, such as Richard Posner and Oliver Williamson and the so-called Chicago School of economists and lawyers including Milton Friedman and Gary Becker, are generally advocates of deregulation and privatisation, and are hostile to state regulation or what they see as restrictions on the operation of free markets

The most prominent economic analyst of law is 1991 Nobel Prize winner Ronald Coase, whose first major article, The Nature of the Firm (1937), argued that the reason for the existence of firms (companies, partnerships, etc.) is the existence of transaction costs. Rational individuals trade through bilateral contracts on open markets until the costs of transactions mean that using corporations to produce things is more cost-effective. His second major article, The Problem of Social Cost (1960), argued that if we lived in a world without transaction costs, people would bargain with one another to create the same allocation of resources, regardless of the way a court might rule in property disputes. Coase used the example of a nuisance case named Sturges v Bridgman, where a noisy sweetmaker and a quiet doctor were neighbours and went to court to see who should have to move. Coase said that regardless of whether the judge ruled that the sweetmaker had to stop using his machinery, or that the doctor had to put up with it, they could strike a mutually beneficial bargain about who moves house that reaches the same outcome of resource distribution. Only the existence of transaction costs may prevent this. So the law ought to pre-empt what would happen, and be guided by the most efficient solution. The idea is that law and regulation are not as important or effective at helping people as lawyers and government planners believe. Coase and others like him wanted a change of approach, to put the burden of proof for positive effects on a government that was intervening in the market, by analysing the costs of action.

Sociology of law
Sociology of law is a diverse field of study that examines the interaction of law with society and overlaps with jurisprudence, economic analysis of law and more specialised subjects such as criminology. The institutions of social construction and legal frameworks are the relevant areas for the discipline's inquiry. At first, legal theorists were suspicious of the discipline. Kelsen attacked one of its founders, Eugen Ehrlich, who sought to make distinct the differences between positive law, which lawyers learn and apply, and other forms of 'law' or social norms that regulate everyday life, generally preventing conflicts from reaching lawyers and courts
Around 1900 Max Weber defined his "scientific" approach to law, identifying the "legal rational form" as a type of domination, not attributable to people but to abstract norms. Legal rationalism was his term for a body of coherent and calculable law which formed a precondition for modern political developments and the modern bureaucratic state and developed in parallel with the growth of capitalism. Another sociologist, Émile Durkheim, wrote in The Division of Labour in Society that as society becomes more complex, the body of civil law concerned primarily with restitution and compensation grows at the expense of criminal laws and penal sanctions. Other notable early legal sociologists included Hugo Sinzheimer, Theodor Geiger, Georges Gurvitch and Leon Petrażycki in Europe, and William Graham Sumner in the U.S

Legal institutions
The main institutions of law in industrialised countries are independent courts, representative parliaments, an accountable executive, the military and police, bureaucratic organisation, the legal profession and civil society itself. John Locke, in his Two Treatises of Government, and Baron de Montesquieu in The Spirit of the Laws, advocated for a separation of powers between the political, legislature and executive bodies. Their principle was that no person should be able to usurp all powers of the state, in contrast to the absolutist theory of Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan. Max Weber and others reshaped thinking on the extension of state. Modern military, policing and bureaucratic power over ordinary citizens' daily lives pose special problems for accountability that earlier writers such as Locke or Montesquieu could not have foreseen. The custom and practice of the legal profession is an important part of people's access to justice, whilst civil society is a term used to refer to the social institutions, communities and partnerships that form law's political basis.

Judiciary
A judiciary is a number of judges mediating disputes to determine outcome. Most countries have systems of appeal courts, answering up to a supreme legal authority. In the United States, this is the Supreme Court; in Australia, the High Court; in the UK, the Supreme Court; in Germany, the Bundesverfassungsgericht; in France, the Cour de Cassation. For most European countries the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg can overrule national law, when EU law is relevant. The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg allows citizens of the Council of Europe member states to bring cases relating to human rights issues before it.

Some countries allow their highest judicial authority to over-rule legislation they determined as unconstitutional. In Roe v Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a Texas law which forbade the granting of assistance to women seeking abortion. The U.S.'s constitution's fourteenth amendment was interpreted to give Americans a right to privacy, and thus a woman's right to choose abortion.

A judiciary is theoretically bound by the constitution, much as legislative bodies are. In most countries judges may only interpret the constitution and all other laws. But in common law countries, where matters are not constitutional, the judiciary may also create law under the doctrine of precedent. The UK, Finland and New Zealand assert the ideal of parliamentary sovereignty, whereby the unelected judiciary may not overturn law passed by a democratic legislature. In communist states, such as China, the courts are often regarded as parts of the executive, or subservient to the legislature; governmental institutions and actors exert thus various forms of influence on the judiciary. In Muslim countries, courts often examine whether state laws adhere to the Sharia: the Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt may invalidate such laws, and in Iran the Guardian Council ensures the compatibility of the legislation with the "criteria of Islam

Legislature
Prominent examples of legislatures are the Houses of Parliament in London, the Congress in Washington D.C., the Bundestag in Berlin, the Duma in Moscow, the Parlamento Italiano in Rome and the Assemblée nationale in Paris. By the principle of representative government people vote for politicians to carry out their wishes. Although countries like Israel, Greece, Sweden and China are unicameral, most countries are bicameral, meaning they have two separately appointed legislative houses. In the 'lower house' politicians are elected to represent smaller constituencies. The 'upper house' is usually elected to represent states in a federal system (as in Australia, Germany or the United States) or different voting configuration in a unitary system (as in France). In the UK the upper house is appointed by the government as a house of review. One criticism of bicameral systems with two elected chambers is that the upper and lower houses may simply mirror one another. The traditional justification of bicameralism is that an upper chamber acts as a house of review. This can minimise arbitrariness and injustice in governmental action.

To pass legislation, a majority of Members of Parliament must vote for a bill (proposed law) in each house. Normally there will be several readings and amendments proposed by the different political factions. If a country has an entrenched constitution, a special majority for changes to the constitution will be required, making changes to the law more difficult. A government usually leads the process, which can be formed from Members of Parliament (e.g. the UK or Germany). But in a presidential system, an executive appoints a cabinet to govern from his or her political allies whether or not they are elected (e.g. the United States or Brazil), and the legislature's role is reduced to either ratification or veto.

Executive
The executive in a legal system serve as a government's centre of political authority. In a parliamentary system, as with Britain, Italy, Germany, India, and Japan, the executive is known as the cabinet, and composed of members of the legislature. The executive is chosen by the Prime Minister or Chancellor, whose office holds power under the confidence of the legislature. Because popular elections appoint political parties to govern, the leader of a party can change in between elections. The head of state is apart from the executive, and symbolically enacts laws and acts as representative of the nation. Examples include the German president (appointed by the Parliament); the Queen of the United Kingdom (a hereditary title), and the Austrian president (elected by popular vote). The other important model is the presidential system, found in France, the U.S. and Russia. In presidential systems, the executive acts as both head of state and head of government, and has power to appoint an unelected cabinet. Under a presidential system, the executive branch is separate from the legislature to which is not accountable.

Although the role of the executive varies from country to country, usually it will propose the majority of legislation, and propose government agenda. In presidential systems, the executive often has the power to veto legislation. Most executives in both systems are responsible for foreign relations, the military and police, and the bureaucracy. Ministers or other officials head a country's public offices, such as a foreign ministry or interior ministry. The election of a different executive is therefore capable of revolutionising an entire country's approach to government.

Military and police
While military organizations have existed as long as government itself, the idea of a standing police force is relatively modern concept. Mediæval England's system of traveling criminal courts, or assizes, used show trials and public executions to instill communities with fear to maintain control. The first modern police were probably those in 17th-century Paris, in the court of Louis XIV, although the Paris Prefecture of Police claim they were the world's first uniformed policemen.

Weber famously argued that the state is that which controls the legitimate monopoly of the means of violence. The military and police carry out enforcement at the request of the government or the courts. The term failed state refers to states that cannot implement or enforce policies; their police and military no longer control security and order and society moves into anarchy, the absence of government.

Bureaucracy
The etymology of "bureaucracy" derives from the French word for "office" (bureau) and the Ancient Greek for word "power" (kratos). Like the military and police, a legal system's government servants and bodies that make up its bureaucracy carry out the directives of the executive. One of the earliest references to the concept was made by Baron de Grimm, a German author who lived in France. In 1765 he wrote,

The real spirit of the laws in France is that bureaucracy of which the late Monsieur de Gournay used to complain so greatly; here the offices, clerks, secretaries, inspectors and intendants are not appointed to benefit the public interest, indeed the public interest appears to have been established so that offices might exist.

Cynicism over "officialdom" is still common, and the workings of public servants is typically contrasted to private enterprise motivated by profit. In fact private companies, especially large ones, also have bureaucracies. Negative perceptions of "red tape" aside, public services such as schooling, health care, policing or public transport are a crucial state function making public bureaucratic action the locus of government power. Writing in the early 20th century, Max Weber believed that a definitive feature of a developed state had come to be its bureaucratic support. Weber wrote that the typical characteristics of modern bureaucracy are that officials define its mission, the scope of work is bound by rules, management is composed of career experts, who manage top down, communicating through writing and binding public servants' discretion with rules.

Legal profession
A corollary of the rule of law is the existence of a legal profession sufficiently autonomous to be able to invoke the authority of the independent judiciary; the right to assistance of an advocate in a court proceeding emanates from this corollary—in England the function of barrister or advocate is distinguished from legal counselor (solicitor). As the European Court of Human Rights has stated, the law should be adequately accessible to everyone and people should be able to foresee how the law affects them. In order to maintain professionalism, the practice of law is typically overseen by either a government or independent regulating body such as a bar association, bar council or law society. Modern lawyers achieve distinct professional identity through specified legal procedures (e.g. successfully passing a qualifying examination), are required by law to have a special qualification (a legal education earning the student a Bachelor of Laws, a Bachelor of Civil Law or a Juris Doctor degree), and are constituted in office by legal forms of appointment (being admitted to the bar). Most Muslim countries have developed similar rules about legal education and the legal profession, but some still allow lawyers with training in traditional Islamic law to practice law before personal status law courts. In China and other developing countries there are not enough law-trained people to staff the existing judicial systems, and, accordingly, formal standards are more relaxed.

Once accredited, a lawyer will often work in a law firm, in a chambers as a sole practitioner, in a government post or in a private corporation as an internal counsel. In addition a lawyer may become a legal researcher who provides on-demand legal research through a library, a commercial service or through freelance work. Many people trained in law put their skills to use outside the legal field entirely. Significant to the practice of law in the common law tradition is the legal research to determine the current state of the law. This usually entails exploring case-law reports, legal periodicals and legislation. Law practice also involves drafting documents such as court pleadings, persuasive briefs, contracts, or wills and trusts. Negotiation and dispute resolution skills (including ADR techniques) are also important to legal practice, depending on the field.

Civil society
Classical republican concept of "civil society" dates back to Hobbes and Locke. Locke saw civil society as people who have "a common established law and judicature to appeal to, with authority to decide controversies between them." German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel distinguished the "state" from "civil society" (burgerliche Gesellschaft) in Elements of the Philosophy of Right. Hegel believed that civil society and the state were polar opposites, within the scheme of his dialectic theory of history. The modern dipole state–civil society was reproduced in the theories of Alexis de Tocqueville and Karl Marx. Nowadays in post-modern theory civil society is necessarily a source of law, by being the basis from which people form opinions and lobby for what they believe law should be. As Australian barrister and author Geoffrey Robertson QC wrote of international law,

... one of its primary modern sources is found in the responses of ordinary men and women, and of the non-governmental organizations which many of them support, to the human rights abuses they see on the television screen in their living rooms.

Freedom of speech, freedom of association and many other individual rights allow people to gather, discuss, criticise and hold to account their governments, from which the basis of a deliberative democracy is formed. The more people are involved with, concerned by and capable of changing how political power is exercised over their lives, the more acceptable and legitimate the law becomes to the people. The most familiar institutions of civil society include economic markets, profit-oriented firms, families, trade unions, hospitals, universities, schools, charities, debating clubs, non-governmental organisations, neighbourhoods, churches, and religious associations.

LAW AND THE MAFIA

ASSESSING GOVERNMENT LAWFUL Special Committee
The mention of names Vice President Boediono and Minister of Finance Sri Mulyani Indrawati, in view of the end of the Special Committee faction Questionnaire Century Bank protests.
Minister of Justice and Human Rights Patrialis Akbar said the Special Committee investigation results should be confidential. That is not in accordance with the law. Thus, the name we think, not exactly, said Patrialis in the office of President.

Should be, the Special Committee prioritizes the principle of presumption of innocence in revealing the results of its investigation, said Patrialis. We have the right to speak at the public how the government's position from a legal standpoint, politician added that the National Mandate Party.

However, the government will not deliver a note of protest or objection to the House of Representatives relating to mention those names.
The government just wants the Special Committee to realize that from a legal standpoint, the name was not appropriate, because the so-called proven guilty yet, said Patrialis.
The police also said the same thing. The police asserted, the Special Committee is not an investigator or legal institutions of the right to determine whether or not a person.
Ito Sumardi Kabareskrim Komjen rate, mention the names of the committee was illegal because the person who called had not been charged. It has violated human rights.

Police confirmed Boediono and Sri Mulyani can not say guilty because there is no evidence and facts. According to Ito, to determine whether the two officials had violated the criminal act there must be evidence and sufficient preliminary data.
Members of the Special Committee of Struggle PDI faction Hendrawan Supratikno denied the assumption that the fraction of the name of a person in charge, is considered to have violated the law. We did not directly mention the name, we always say the word may be reasonably suspected of concerned, Hendrawan said.
Hendrawan should instead assess the fraction of the mention of the ammunition for the Police investigation against the people who called.
Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) asserted, Century Bank of the case investigation should be completed. ICW rate was no indication of criminal violations in the provision of the bailout. There were no recommendations or Special Committee, the case must be dismantled Century Bank, said the Deputy Coordinator of ICW, Febri Diansyah.


FOR PASSING THE YEAR 2009 MA 319 CORRUPTION CASES
In the year 2009 and then, the Supreme Court (MA) has 319 prosecute corruption cases. Of this amount, the Supreme Court sentenced the defendant fines for corruption reached Rp 154 billion. This is described Chairman MA Harifin A. When giving a report Tumpa MA 2009, in the Supreme Court Building.

Supreme Court also issued a money substitute decision reached Rp 297.8 billion. Harifin states, most of the Supreme Court decision ended pemindanaan defendants (88%) and only 12% that led to the release of the defendant. This shows tinggkat a very high consistency between the lower-level courts with the Supreme Court decision.

From the 319 corruption cases that the Supreme Court decided, for the defendant's sentencing under one year reached 8 cases, the punishment of one to two years as many as 163 cases, three to five years 83 cases, six to ten years there are 4 cases, and the free decision reached 34 cases.
To prosecute corruption cases are still many, MA also soon open a recruitment ad hoc court judges corruption (Corruption). Additional Judge of 27 people who were elected in February 17, 2009, have been inadequate. This is a very urgent need, said Harifin.

Ideally, the Corruption court has four judges for the first-level courts, four for the courts of appeals, and ten people to the Supreme Court. Seventh Corruption court located in Jakarta, Medan, Palembang, Bandung, Semarang, Samarinda and Makassar.
MA claimed that since 2005 it successfully improve the disconnected case, from 11,023 in 2008 to 14,483 in 2009. Arrears cases continue to be settled, Harifin said.


LEGAL MAFIA Task Force
Combat Task Force football exploits widening Legal Mafia. After making a breakthrough with the inspections, Women Rutan Pondok Bambu, by monitoring dilajutkan tax pengemplang cases, including Asian Agri. Currently, the unit was commanded by Kuntoro Mangkusubroto also apparently entered into in cases related to bankruptcy.
In fact, the Task Force investigating bankruptcy cases positioned as one of the priority programs. Because this case vulnerable to mafia practices law, said Mas Achmad Santosa, Member Task Force on the Supreme Court building.
But alas, Mas Achmad is familiarly called Ota is not going to disclose any further bankruptcy cases such as what is, and will be followed up Task Force.

Besides bankruptcy cases are vulnerable to the practice of law mafia, Task Force also has included three cases of the priorities, namely the case of taxation, drugs, and corruption. But Ota insists, Task Force did not enter the realm of law enforcement, because it is the authority of police, prosecution, and the Commission.
Task Force as the task of targeting over the next two years, internal control in institutions of law enforcement to run more effectively.

Committee FINAL CONCLUSION
Committee Rights Questionnaire Century Bank have not been able to formulate the final conclusions will be brought to the Plenary Meeting of the Parliament. Small team consisting of nine members of the committee, still must match the view. But committee Chairman Idrus Marham make sure the team can complete the final conclusions.
The most heated debate in formulating final conclusions about the policy committee is giving bailouts (bailout) Rp 6.76 trillion. If the team does not also reach an agreement, then the conclusions submitted to the Plenary Meeting can be more than one. But that would not alter the view of the faction, Idrus said, according to the Special Committee Meeting.
Members of the Special Committee of the Democratic, Anas Urbaningrum, expect a small team can make a conclusion that reflects the overall examination committee. We leave it to this team, says Anas, who is also Chairman of the Faction.
Another committee member of the Democrats, Benny K. Harman, still convinced factions conclusions could change. This is in line with the occurrence of political lobbying in the committee. Should no longer views the plural in the conclusion, said Benny.
However, committee members of the faction Hanura Faisal Akbar did not approve an effort to unite the committee final conclusions. Because, many view the factions can not be united because there is a clear distinction. Difference choice of words alone is complicated, said Akbar.
Members of the Special Committee of the PPP firmly Romahurmuziy revealed, that the Democratic Party is very difficult to secure the position of Vice President Boediono and Minister of Finance Sri Mulyani. Plenary not about right or wrong, but win or lose. PPP attitude remains, only 1% of our possibilities to change the view.

PRESIDENT OF INDONESIA
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono confirmed will be responsible for the case of Century Bank. He also said he would soon deliver the official speech-related cases.

The speech will be delivered directly to all the people. I, the Head of State, certainly the most responsible in the field of development, life and others, said the President before the Cabinet meeting to lead-P 2010 Budget in the Office of the President.

However, SBY can not specify when he would deliver the speech. SBY admitted deliberately did not respond or respond every day of the investigation Century Bank case. If I do, it will happen Gonjang-ganjing, and I was not attracted to it to respond to daily issues.
The President said that the government has given authority to the Coordinating Minister Djoko Suyanto Polkumham to respond to the issues that developed. Please can anyone tell statement. Menkopolkam response from the government.