Mekanisme Impeachment Presiden: Antara Hukum Tata Negara dan Fiqh Siyasah

P  Before the 1945 Constitution was amended, the President's impeachment procedure in the Indonesian Republic State was judged legally flawed and more politically nuanced, as it did not offer clear rules for the impeachment mechanism. This study compares the President's impeachment procedure after the 1945 Constitution was amended from the standpoint of siyasah syar'iyyah, using both legal and historical perspectives. The findings of this article demonstrate that the procedure of impeachment of the President in the 1945 Constitution after amendment, as well as in the fiqh siyasah review, is essentially the same, but the practice and explanation differ slightly. Impeachment is intended for the prosecution or summoning of the President or Caliph to be held responsible in front of the council, which is known as deliberation in siyasah syar'iyyah. While the difference in state law is explicitly and in detail stated in the Constitution following modifications, as well as the Constitutional Court Law, the history of fiqh siyasah is not precisely regulated, with the most severe example being the dismissal of the President or Caliph. In state law, if a Head of State can no longer carry out his duties properly and there has been a grave criminal violation, the impeachment mechanism is carried out through legal processes regulated in the 1945 Constitution, whereas in fiqh siyasah, if the Caliph betrays the state and has breached the contract agreement, the people can resort to violence, war, and even murder to bring him down