Legal Certainty Regarding the Execution of State Administrative Court Decisions That Have Permanent Legal Force

Asep Muhidin

doi:10.31943/afkarjournal.v6i4.782

Authors

Asep Muhidin Universitas Islam Bandung

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31943/afkarjournal.v6i4.782

Keywords:

State Administrative Court, Verdict Execution, Legal certainty

Abstract

As a rule of law country, Indonesia has regulated the settlement of administrative disputes between legal entities and the government, individuals and the government, and employees and the government which are examined, resolved and decided by the State Administrative Court (PTUN). PTUN decisions that have permanent legal force (inkracht van gewijsde) must be implemented by the party ordered in the decision. However, there are still many government officials who do not implement PTUN decisions that have permanent legal force. invitation. Based on Article 116 of Law Number 51 of 2009 concerning the Second Amendment to Law Number 5 of 1986 concerning the State Administrative Court (UU PRATUN), the Head of the State Administrative Court only submits a letter to the President as the holder of the highest government power to order the official to implement the court's decision, and to the people's representative institutions to carry out the oversight function. This method is not effective because the actualization of the President and the DPR (people's representatives) has not been found in writing to warn officials who do not comply with the law, causing legal uncertainty. This study aims to find out what obstacles that lead to disobedience or non-implementation of PTUN decisions that have permanent legal force by government officials and what efforts must be made because there is no special field as the executor of the forced execution of PTUN decisions. This research uses a descriptive analysis method and a normative juridical approach. From the results of the research, it was found that the government must have the courage to make breakthroughs in the institutions of the State Administrative Court so that the decisions of PTUN judges have value and are respected, namely making rules regarding the establishment of special bodies or fields that have duties and functions as executors of PTUN decisions to create and realize the principle of legal certainty in the rule of law for all citizens who are in dispute so that in the future the PTUN decision will no longer be branded as a toothless tiger because the implementation of forced executions by the judiciary and other state security institutions cannot yet be implemented because there are no laws and regulations that strictly regulate the execution of forced executions of Administrative Court Decisions State Enterprises by whom and in what procedures

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdullah Rozali, Hukum Kepegawaian, Jakarta, Penerbit CV Rajawali, 1986.

Arifin Marpaung, “Pelaksanaan Putusan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Melalui Upaya Paksa”, (Disertasi Program Pascasarjana Universitas Airlangga; Surabaya, 2010).

Asep Muhidin, Mahasiswa Program Studi Magister Ilmu Hukum Universitas Islam Bandung, tahun 2021

Asikin zainal, Pengantar Tata Hukum Indonesia, Rajawali Press, Jakarta 2012.

Cst Kansil, Christine , S.T Kansil, Engelien R, Palandeng dan Godlieb N Mamahit, Kamus Istilah Hukum, Jakarta, 2009.

Dominikus Rato, Filsafat Hukum Mencari: memahami dan memahami hukum, Laksbang Pressindo, Yogyakarta, 2010.

Dwika, Keadilan Dari Dimensi Sistem Hukum, http://hukum.kompasiana.com.(02/04/2011), diakses pada 5 Juli 2022.

George H. Sabine, A History of Political Theory, Third Edition, (New York – Chicago – San Fransisco – Toronto – London; Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1961), hal. 35-86 dan 88-105 dikutif dalam Modul Pendidikan Negara Hukum Dan Demokrasi, Pusat Pendidikan Pancasia Dan Konstitusi Mahkamah Konstitusi 2016.

Jimly Asshiddiqie, Cita Negara Hukum Indonesia Kontemporer, Papper. Disampaikan dalam Wisuda Sarjana Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sriwijaya Palembang, 23 Maret 2004 dalam Simbur Cahaya No. 25 Tahun IX Mei 2004.

Marpaung, “Pelaksanaan Putusan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Melalui Upaya Paksa”, (Disertasi Program Pascasarjana Universitas Airlangga; Surabaya, 2010).

M Yahya Harahap, Hukum Acara Perdata tentang Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan, Pembuktian, dan Putusan Pengadian, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2005, hlmn. 181 yang dikutif oleh Ali Abdulah dalam buku Teori & Praktik Hukum cara Peradilan tata Usaha Negara Pasca Amandemen, Prenadamedia Group, Jakarta, 2015.

Mukti Fajar dan Yulianto Achmad, Dualisme Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris, Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta, 2010.

Mohammad Afifudin Soleh, Eksekusi Terhadap Putusan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Yang Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap, (Mimbar Keadilan; Jurnal Ilmu Hukum), Februari 2018. PALAR (Pakuan Law Review) Volume 06, Nomor 02, Juli-Desember 2020.

Paulus Effendi Lotulung, “Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara Di Indonesia Dibandingkan Dengan Peradilan Administrasi Yang Berlaku Di Berbagai Negara”, dalam Mengakji Kembali Pokok-Pokok Pikiran Pembentukan Perdailan Tata Usaha Negara, LPP-HAN, Jakarta, 2003, Hlm. 64. PALAR (Pakuan Law Review) Volume 06, Nomor 02, Juli-Desember 2020

Peter Mahmud Marzuki, Pengantar Ilmu Hukum, Kencana, Jakarta, 2008.

Samudra Putra Indratanto, Nurainun, and Kristoforus Laga Kleden, Jurnal Imu Hukum 16, no. 1, 2020.

Supandi, Problematika Penerapan Eksekusi Putusan Peradilan TUN Terhadap Pejabat TUN Daerah, makalah disampaikan pada Workshop tentang Penerapan Eksekusi Putusan PTUN Dalam Kaitannya dengan Pelaksanaan Otonomi Daerah, (LPP-HAN bekerjasama dengan KNH: Jakarta, 2004.

Supandi, Kepatuhan Pejabat Dalam Menaati Putusan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara”, (Disertasi Program Pascasarjana Universitas Sumatera Utara; Medan), 2005.

Soeroso, Pengantar Ilmu Hukum, PT. Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2011.

Utrecht, Pengantar Hukum Administrasi Negara Indonesia, Jakarta: Ichtiar, 1962.

Undang-undang Dasar (UUD) 1945

Undang-undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1986 tentang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara yang telah diubah terakhir kali oleh Undang-undang Nomor 51 tahun 2009 tentang Perubahan Kedua Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1986 tentang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara

Undang-undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman

Undang-undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi pemerintahan

Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2016 Tentang Pemberlakuan Rumusan Hasil Rapat Pleno Kamar Mahkamah Agung Tahun 2016.

Wawancara dengan perwakilan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Bandung dengan salah satu Hakim yang mewakili PTUN Bandung, Ayi Solehudin diruang rapat ketua Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Bandung, 18 Mei 2022