Keadilan substantif dalam Ultra Petita Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi

The Constitutional Court to be the constitutional goalkeeper, there is not anything contrary against constitution. The Constitutional Court has four authorities and one duty, the authority of the Constitutional Court first and foremost is judicial review the law against Constitution. According to Constitutional Court law, the Decision of judicial review is accepted, rejected and unacceptable. The decision is acceptable if the applicant's request is grounded in the state memorandum filed for which there is no binding legal force. However, in its development, they performed ultra petite by raising the difference to the granted decision, the Constitutional Court with conditionallyconstitutional, conditionally unconstitutional and added phrase. Amendment of constitutional court law, expressly the Constitution Law is prohibited to add the phrase, then enforced by the Constitutional Court. The judge at the Constitutional Court considered that in keeping with the constitution the institution could not be confined by law and that the judge was ordered to uphold justice rather than enforce the law. This article research decision of Constitutional Court Conditionally Constitutional and adds a phrase to find whether in the decision it is really to enforce justice which accuracy cannot be realized if it simply removes the petitioned article. From the results of the study, the authors found that it does give the constitution and cannot be applied if it only provides without interpretation and adds phrases.