POLA AKUNTABILITAS ANGGOTA BADAN PERWAKILAN RAKYAT: IDENTIFIKASI TERHADAP CITY COUNCIL DI LIVERPOOL, VANCOUVER, DAN SHAH ALAM (THE ACCOUNTABILITY PATTERN OF MEMBER OF THE REPRESENTATIVE BODY: IDENTIFICATION TOWARD THE CITY COUNCILS IN THE LIVERPOOL, VANCOUVER, AND SHAH ALAM)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indonesian legal system determines that the Local Representatives Body, known as the DPRD has the functions to establishing, supervising the execution of local affairs and budgeting. Those functions provides the rights to the DPRD both collectively and individually. However, there are also legal obligations applied only for individual. The problem is those three functions has not been embodied properly in the elaborated duties of the Representatives Body. It can be seen, that inspite of the collectivity, a number of duties are also inherent to the member of DPRD individually. Yet, the existing provisions have lack of support for the member of DPRD to increase their competence in order to strengthen those functions. In this paper, the author try to identify some models of individual accountability where there is a practical references applied in the three-municipalities, which are city council of Liverpool, Vancouver and Shah Alam. Considered as identification due to that there are no similarity certainty for all the mentioned places. Eventually, once the pattern of accountability has been found, it becomes the raw material of recommendation on revision of the Local Government Act. ABSTRAK Peraturan perundang-undangan memberikan fungsi pembentukan peraturan daerah, fungsi pengawasan, dan fungsi anggaran, kepada DPRD Provinsi dan DPRD Kabupaten/Kota. Ketiga fungsi tersebut memunculkan hak-hak secara kelembagaan maupun secara individu. Namun masih terjadi kesenjangan, yaitu ketiga fungsi secara kolektif dan kolegial tersebut belum diperkuat dengan ketentuan kewajiban yang tepat. Unsur kewajiban hanya dilekatkan kepada individu anggota, karena yang merepresentasikan rakyat pemilih adalah individu dan bukan kolektif. Meskipun demikian, ketentuan yang ada tidak dapat menjadikan anggota DPRD untuk meningkatkan kompetensinya supaya dapat memperkuat ketiga fungsi tersebut. Penelitian ini ingin mencari bagaimana rumusan model akuntabilitas anggota DPRD secara individu. Untuk memperoleh konsep tersebut, dilakukan perbandingan hukum mengenai praktik yang diterapkan di berbagai tempat sebagai cara memastikan fungsi-fungsi semacam city council terlaksana. Penelitian ini juga ingin menunjukkan bahwa upaya-upaya tersebut dapat diidentifikasi sebagai model akuntabilitas terhadap para councilor. Oleh karena itu, tujuan yang dikehendaki dari penelitian ini adalah terbangun konsep akuntabilitas anggota DPRD di Indonesia. Untuk mencapai tujuan tersebut dilakukan pendekatan komparatif di Liverpool, Vancouver, dan Shah Alam. Adapun rekomendasi dalam penelitian ini berupa bahan perumusan ketentuan dalam suatu perubahan Undang-Undang Pemerintahan Daerah.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".