Fundamental Principles and Relevance of Reviewing Factual Actions within the Authority of the State Administrative Court
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31941/pj.v23i1.4883Abstract
The State Administrative Court (PTUN) plays a critical role in ensuring lawful and accountable governance. Traditionally, its purview focused on reviewing legal aspects of administrative decisions. However, recent developments grant the State Administrative Court authority to examine factual actions taken by the government. This article explores the fundamental principles underpinning this expanded authority. It delves into concepts like legality, proportionality, and good governance, analyzing how the State Administrative Court ensures these principles are upheld in factual actions. The article further analyzes regulations governing the State Administrative Court of various countries, including France, Netherlands, and England. By identifying similarities and variations in how these nations empower their SACs, the article presents a helpful perspective into best practices and potential challenges. Thus, this article offers valuable insights into the evolving role of SACs in promoting a more just and transparent administrative system.
Downloads
References
Abdoellah, Priyatmanto. 2016. Revitalisasi Kewenangan PTUN Gagasan Perluasan Kompetensi Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara. Yogyakarta: Cahaya Atma Pustaka.
Agustina, Rosa. 2003. “Perbuatan Melawan Hukum.” Pascasarjana, Universitas Indonesia.
Anggito, Albi, and Johan Setiawan. 2018. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. CV Jejak (Jejak Publisher).
Asyiah, Nur. 2016. “Eksitensi Perlindungan Hukum Warga Negara Terhadap Tindakan Pemerintah Dalam Membuat Keputusan Administrasi Negara.” Jurnal Hukum Samudra Keadilan 11 (1): 44–54.
Barkhuysen, Tom, Willemien den Ouden, and Ymre E. Schuurmans. 2012. “The Law on Administrative Procedures in the Netherlands.” Nall. https://doi.org/10.5553/NALL/.000005.
Brown, L. N., J. Bell, and J. M. Galabert. 1998. French Administrative Law. USA: Oxford University Press.
Burhanuddin, Nizam, and Dwi Putri Cahyawati. 2024. “The Indonesian and French Justice System (in Comparison of Structure and Mechanism).” In 4th International Conference on Law Reform, 335–46. KnE Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v8i21.14739.
Dewi, A. A. I. A. A., Dharmawan, N. K. S., Krisnayanti, A. A. I. E., Samsithawrati, P. A., & Kurniawan, I. G. A. (2022). The Role of Human Rights and Customary Law to Prevent Early Childhood Marriage in Indonesia. Sriwijaya Law Review, 6(2), 268–285. https://doi.org/10.28946/slrev.Vol6.Iss2.1885.pp268-285
Disantara, F. P. (2024). Innovative Legal Approaches for Contemporary Challenges in Indonesia. Indonesian Journal of Innovation Studies, 25(4). https://doi.org/10.21070/ijins.v25i4.1241
Disantara, F. P., Putri, F. F., Mufarrochah, S., & Assari, E. (2023). EKSTENTIFIKASI KEWENANGAN MAJELIS KEHORMATAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM MEMPERKUAT GAGASAN CONSTITUTIONAL ETHICS. LITIGASI, 1(24), 40–63. https://doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v24i1.7232
Drewry, G. 2009. “The Judicialisation of ‘Administrative’Tribunals in the UK: From Hewart to Leggatt.” Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences 5 (28): 45–64.
Elpah, Dani. 2016. Pokok Pikiran Dan Konsep Dasar Administrasi Pemerintahan. Pusdiklat Mahkamah Agung RI.
Flora, H. S., Disantara, F. P., & Thuong, M. T. H. (2023). The Lex Favor Reo Principle After New Criminal Code: A Corrective Justice’s Perspective. Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi Dan Kajian Hukum, 22(2), 67–80.
Garner, J. W. 1924. “French Administrative Law.” The Yale Law Journal 33 (6): 597–627.
Gede Agus Kurniawan, I. (2023). The Existence of Copyrights on Traditional Cultural Expressions Held by the State: Implications and Orientations. In Intellectual Property - Global Perspective Advances and Challenges [Working Title]. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.1001312
Graaf, Kars J. de, Albert T. Marseille, and Marc Wever. 2022. “Rebalancing Indirect Judicial Review of Administrative Action in the Netherlands.” In Indirect Judicial Review in Administrative Law, 117–35. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003164302-7.
Leonard, Lapon Tukan, and Novia Suci Ramadhani. 2023. “Implication of the State Administrative Court Authority to Review the Factual Action of Government Officials Due to the Existence of the Law No. 30 of 2014.” In Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainability in Technological, Environmental, Law, Management, Social and Economic Matters, ICOSTELM 2022, 4-5 November 2022, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia. EAI. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.4-11-2022.2329647.
Kurniawan, I. G. A. (2022a). Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Terhadap Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja Dalam Perspektif Filsafat Utilitarianisme. JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW, 5(1), 282–298. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.26623/julr.v5i1.4941
Kurniawan, I. G. A. (2022b). The Reconstruction of Subjectum Litis in Term of Reflections on Constitutional Dissolution of Political Parties. Jurnal Akta, 9(1), 104–119. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.30659/akta.v9i1.20970
Kurniawan, I. G. A. (2022c). Klausula Eksonerasi Dalam Bisnis Perspektif Hukum Progresif. Istinbath : Jurnal Hukum, 19(02), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.32332/istinbath.v19i02.4784
Lotulung, Paulus Effendi. 1993. Beberapa Sistem Tentang Kontrol Segi Hukum Terhadap Pemerintah (Edisi Ke II Dengan Revisi). Bandung: PT. Citra Aditya Bakti.
Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. 2009. “Laporan Studi Banding Ke Perancis Tentang Kompetensi Peradilan Administrasi.”
———. 2018. “Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 6 Tahun 2018 Tentang Pedoman Penyelesaian Sengketa Administrasi Pemerintahan Setelah Menempuh Upaya Administratif.”
———. 2019. “Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 2 Tahun 2019 Tentang Pedoman Penyelesaian Perkara Perbuatan Melanggar Hukum Oleh Badan Dan/Atau Pejabat Pemerintahan (Onrechtmatige Overheidsdaad).”
Marzuki, L. H. 2017. “Pemberlakuan Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 Tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan Dalam Konteks Perkembangan Kompetensi Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara RI.” Implementation Science 39.
Menski, W. 2019. Perbandingan Hukum Dalam Konteks Global: Sistem Eropa, Asia Dan Afrika. Nusamedia.
Muchsan. 1997. Sistem Pengawasan Terhadap Perbuatan Aparat Pemerintah Dan Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara Di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Liberty.
Republik Indonesia. 1986. “Undang-Undang Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5 Tahun 1986 Tentang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara.” Sekretariat Negara.
———. 2004. “Undang-Undang Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 9 Tahun 2004 Tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5 Tahun 1986 Tentang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara.” Sekretariat Negara.
———. 2009. “Undang-Undang Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 51 Tahun 2009 Tentang Perubahan Kedua Atas Undang-Undang Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5 Tahun 1986 Tentang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara.” Sekretariat Negara.
———. 2019. “Undang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2019 Tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2011 Tentang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan.” Sekretariat Negara.
Ridwan. 2014. Diskresi Dan Tanggungjawab Pemerintah. Yogyakarta: FH UII Press.
Schwandt, T. A. 1994. “Constructivist, Interpretivist Approaches to Human Inquiry.” In Handbook of Qualitative Research, 118–37.
Usfunan, J. 2002. Perbuatan Pemerintah Yang Dapat Digugat. Jakarta: Djambatan.
Wahyunadi, Yodi Martono. 2016. “Kompetensi Absolut Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Dalam Konteks Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 Tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan.” Disertasi Program Pascasarjana Doktor Ilmu Hukum, Jakarta: Universitas Trisakti.
Wardhana, A. 2020. “Perbuatan Melanggar Hukum Pemerintah (Onrechtsmatige Overheidsdaad) Dalam Konteks Kompetensi Absolut Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara.” Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Airlangga.
Yasin, Muhammad, Laode Rudita, Sad Dian Utomo, Maya Rostanty, Muhamad Imam Alfie Syarien, and Nidaan Khafian. 2017. Anotasi Undang-Undang No. 30 Tahun 2014 Tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia–Center for Study of Governance and Administrative Reform (UI-CSGAR).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Suroto Suroto
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
