Post-Legislative Scrutiny in Indonesia: A Misconception and Proposed Solutions

Abstract

The post-legislative scrutiny’s problem lies in the misunderstood definition of evaluation, the implementing agency, and in the drafting of review questions in the evaluation process. This article argues, first, that the definition of monitoring and evaluation of law is reviewing law effectiveness, not including its legal or ideological compatibility with the constitution as in a preparatory process of law-making or a judicial review. Second, the evaluating agency should be both the legislature and the president, who hold equal law-making power in the case of Indonesia. Third, the review questions can be drafted from the law-making process indicated not only in Hansard, academic drafts (white paper), and meeting minutes, but also in the law-purpose provisions stipulated under the reviewed law. The authors will also conduct comparisons to other countries’ practices in proposing PLS for Indonesian legislative drafters and governmental stakeholders.