Juridical analysis of DPD legislation functions in the constitutional system

This existence of the DPD institution in the Indonesian constitutional system after 3rd amendment of the 1945 Constitution aims to reform the structure of the Indonesian
parliament which was originally based on a unicameral system (one room) into a bicameral (two room) system consisting of DPR and DPD. The object of this research is intended to know juridically about the DPD Legislation function in the constitutional system and to know how to analyze the Constitutional Law on the authority of the DPD. Politically DPD in the parliamentary system in Indonesia aims to better accommodate the interests of a region by giving a place for other regions to place their representatives in the
national level representative bodies in terms of fighting for and voicing the interests of their respective regions. This study concludes that the DPD's legislative authority which was originally expanded in accordance with the decision of the Constitutional Court No 92/ PUU-X / 2012 was apparently not accommodated in the formulation of Law No. 17 of 2014 this is in accordance with the legal reality that in the MD3 law there are still several articles that precisely narrow the constitutional authority of the DPD. Following up on a juridical analysis relating to the implementation of regional autonomy in terms of having limited capacity, it is only limited to giving consideration, this shows that the existence of the DPD function has weaknesses because it cannot maximally fight for regional interests and the possibility of the DPD as a bargaining institution that is not followed up by the Parliament. The DPD cannot use the veto in canceling the draft law which is not in accordance with the regional interests as given in the bicameral representation system