scholarly journals The Position of the Attorney's Request for Information in Corruption Case Investigation as the Object of the Application for Abuse of Authority in the State Administrative Court (Study of Decision Number: 25 / G / 2015 / PTUN-MDN)

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 590
Author(s):  
Leni Eva Nurianti ◽  
Yuslim Yuslim ◽  
Khairani Khairani
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Abuse Of Power ◽  
Government Administration ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Object Based ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
The Government

The absolute authority of the State Administrative Court in examining, deciding and resolving State Administrative Disputes is based on objects in the form of decisions and / or actions regulated in the State Administrative Court Law (PERATUN Law) and the Government Administration Law (AP Law). In Decision Number: 25 / G / 2015 / PTUN-MDN, the Prosecutor's Request for Information is placed as the object of the request for abuse of authority. Based on these facts, normative legal research is carried out which aims to examine and analyze cases (case approach) with the statute approach and other regulations related to legal issues regarding how the limits of abuse of power are the absolute competence of the State Administrative Court and what is the position. Request for a statement from the Attorney General's Office in investigating corruption cases in the Procedural Law of the State Administrative Court. The conclusion of the research results is that the limit of abuse of power which is the absolute competence of the State Administrative Court is a decision and / or action as normalized in the Administrative Law and the Government Administration Law. The absence of procedural norms on abuse of authority in the Administrative Court Law makes Judges and Lawyers inaccurate in determining the legal basis for placing the Prosecutor's Request for Information as an object in the application for abuse of power when case Number : 25 / G / 2015 / PTUN-MDN is rolling in the Medan State Administrative Court . The norm vacancy is filled by Supreme Court Regulation Number 4 of 2015 which limits the absolute competence of the State Administrative Court in applications for abuse of power after the results of the Supervision of Government Internal Supervisory Apparatus and prior to criminal proceedings. The Prosecutor's Request for Information issued based on the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) cannot be placed as an object based on the norms of Article 2 letter d of Law Number 9 of 2004, so the author advises the President and / or the House of Representatives to design amendments to the Administrative Law so that it is harmonious with the new norms presented by the Government Administration Law and it is hoped that Judges and Lawyers as law enforcers and justice carry out the norms of the Law ethically so that they do not get lost in determining the object of the application for abuse of power. 

scholarly journals Perkembangan Gugatan Perbuatan Melanggar Hukum oleh Pemerintah Pasca-Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 (Development of Lawsuit for Law Violation by the Government Post Statute/Law Number 30 of 2014)

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bagus Oktafian Abrianto ◽  
Xavier Nugraha ◽  
Nathanael Grady
Keyword(s):  
Legal Protection ◽  
The State ◽  
District Court ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Government Administration ◽  
The Past ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Good Will ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
The Government

The existence of a lawsuit for unlawful acts by the authorities (onrechtmatige overheidsdaad) is one of the means of providing legal protection for the citizens from actions (handling) carried out by the government. Over time, the concept of onrechtmatige overheidsdaad has develops dynamically. The change in the concept of the State Administrative Decree in Article 87 of Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration has caused an onrechtmatige overheidsdaad lawsuit which was once the absolute competence of the District Court, and now became the absolute competence of the State Administrative Court. This research attempts to explain the changes in the regulation and changes in the concept of onrechtmatige overheidsdaad after the enactment of Law Number 30 of 2014. The transfer of authority to examine onrechtmatige overheidsdaad lawsuit from the general court to the state administrative court has various juridical consequences, ranging from changes in procedural law, petitum and posita. One of the important consequences is a change related to the implementation or execution of the judicial decision, where in the past, when an onrechtmatige overheidsdaad lawsuit was an absolute competence of a district court, the implementation of the decision depended on the good will of the government. However, after becoming absolute competence of the Administrative Court, there is a mechanism of forced efforts so that the decision can be carried out by the relevant government agencies (defendants).AbstrakKeberadaan gugatan perbuatan melanggar hukum oleh penguasa (onrechtmatige overheidsdaad) merupakan salah satu sarana pelindungan hukum masyarakat atas tindakan (handeling) yang dilakukan oleh pemerintah. Adapun konsep mengenai onrechtmatige overheidsdaad berkembang secara dinamis dari waktu ke waktu. Perubahan konsep Keputusan Tata Usaha Negara (KTUN) di dalam Pasal 87 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan, menyebabkan gugatan onrechtmatige overheidsdaad yang dahulu merupakan kompetensi absolut Pengadilan Negeri, berubah menjadi kompetensi absolut Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara. Penelitian ini berusaha memaparkan mengenai perubahan pengaturan dan perubahan konsep onrechtmatige overheidsdaad pasca berlakunya Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014. Beralihnya kewenangan untuk memeriksa gugatan onrechtmatige overheidsdaad dari lingkungan peradilan umum ke peradilan tata usaha negara memiliki berbagai konsekuensi yuridis, mulai dari perubahan hukum acara, petitum, dan posita. Salah satu konsekuensi yang cukup penting adalah perubahan terkait dengan pelaksanaan putusan atau eksekusi. Dahulu, gugatan onrechtmatige overheidsdaad merupakan kompetensi absolut pengadilan negeri, sehingga pelaksanaan putusan tergantung dari itikad baik (good will) dari pemerintah. Pasca-beralih ke kompetensi absolut PTUN, terdapat mekanisme upaya paksa agar putusan tersebut dapat dijalankan oleh instransi pemerintah terkait (tergugat).

scholarly journals TINJAUAN YURIDIS PENYALAHGUNAAN WEWENANG OLEH PEMERINTAH DALAM KONTRAK PENGADAAN BARANG DAN JASA (STUDI PUTUSAN NO 37/Pid.Sus-TPK/2015/PN/Mtr)

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashari Ashari
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Abuse Of Power ◽  
Government Administration ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
The Government ◽  
Contract Signing

ABSTRAK Berbagai penyimpangan kerap terjadi dalam proses pengadaan barang dan jasa oleh pemerintah dalam menjalankan tugas dan jabatannya sesuai dengan kewenangannya,namun terdapat beberapa pandangan mengenai penyalahgunaan wewenang dalam prespektif hukum administrasi negara (pasal 17 UU No 30/ 2014 tentang administrasi pemerintah ) dan hukum pidana (pasal 3 UU No 20/2001 tentang tindak pidana korupsi). Tujuan peneltian ini untuk mengetahui pengaturan penyalahgunaan wewenang oleh pemerintah dalam UU No 30/2014 dan UU No 20/2001, dan bentuk penyalahgunaan wewenang dalam pengadaan barang dan jasa. Jenis penelitian, yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan kasus. Hasil penelitian, yang dikategorikan sebagai tindakan menyalahgunakan wewenang dalam UU No 30/2014 adalah perbuatan yang menyimpang dari tujuan pemberian kewenangan, asas legalitas dan asas-asas umum pemerintahan yang baik, sedangkan tindakan menyalahgunakan wewenang dalam UU No 20/2001 tidak harus selalu berupa dikeluarkannya keputusan yang bertentangan atau menyalahi suatu aturan. Cukup perbuatan itu melanggar aturan tertulis sebagai dasar kewenangannya, memiliki maksud yang menyimpang, dan berpotensi merugikan Negara. Bentuk penyalahgunaan wewenang pada tahap penunjukan pemenang, tahap penandatangan kontrak yang terjadi dalam bentuk surat penunjukan yang tidak lengkap, dan tahap Penyerahan Barang dan Jasa kata kunci: penyalahgunaan wewenang, pemerintah, barang dan jasaABSTRAC Various irregularities often occur in the process of procuring goods and services by the government in carrying out their duties and positions in accordance with their authority, but there are several views regarding abuse of authority in the perspective of state administrative law (article 17 of Law No. 30/2014 on government administration) and criminal law (article 17). 3 Law No. 20/2001 on criminal acts of corruption). The purpose of this research is to determine the regulation of abuse of power by the government in Law No. 30/2014 and Law No. 20/2001, and forms of abuse of authority in the procurement of goods and services. This type of research, juridical normative with the approach of legislation and cases. The results of the research, which are categorized as acts of abuse of authority in Law No. 30/2014 are acts that deviate from the purpose of granting authority, legality principles and general principles of good governance, while acts of abusing authority in Law No. 20/2001 do not always involve issuing them. decisions that contradict or violate a rule. It is enough that the act violates written rules as the basis of its authority, has a deviant intention, and has the potential to harm the State. The form of abuse of authority at the stage of appointing the winner, the contract signing stage that occurs in the form of an incomplete appointment letter, and the stage of delivery of goods and serviceskeywords: abuse of authority, government, goods and services

scholarly journals Misconception on the Authority Abuse of Power in the Law Enforcement against Corruption

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 51
Author(s):  
Sadjijono Sadjijono ◽  
Bagus Teguh Santoso
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Abuse Of Power ◽  
Government Administration ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
Administrative Jurisdiction

Law No. 30/ 2014 on Government Administration brings the strength and the averment on the performance of the governmental functions which include executive, legislative, and juridical in order to provide the public services (bestuurzorg). Such regulation also aims to prevent and to eliminate any kinds of the maladministration done by the government officials/organs in implementing their functions so that good governance can be realized. In implementing their function, the government should rely on the useful performance (doelmatigheid) and the effectiveness (doeltreffenhgeid) according to the norms of each authority. It is a sophism when the ‘authority’ and/or the ‘competence’ mentioned under the Law No. 30/ 2014 on Government Administration are defined differently in the letterlijk gramatikal wet without associating those terms with an understanding of bevoegheid in an administrative legal concept. An idea that distinctively defines the term ‘competence’ as a right and ‘authority’ as a power is considered as an inconsistent idea, which may cause dualism and distortion in the common law enforcement reffering to the administrative law, particularly related to the concept of the authority abuse of power mentioned under the Law No. 31/ 1999 amended by the Law No. 20/ 2001 on deeds against corruption. As the result, when the notion of ‘authority abuse of power’ is defined as a right (as mentioned in article 1, subsection 5 jo. article 17, Law No. 30/ 2014 on Government Administration), it will be characterized into the absolute competence of the administrative jurisdiction, and when the notion of ‘authority abuse of power’ is defined as a power (as mentioned in article 3, Law No. 31/ 1999 on deeds against corruption), it will be characterized into the absolute competence of the corruption-act jurisdiction. Meanwhile, implementing the government’s ‘competence’ and/or ‘authority’ is characterized into one concept based on the norms of the authority power.

scholarly journals Administrative Law in the Time of Corona(virus)

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-50
Author(s):  
István Hoffman ◽  
István Balázs
Keyword(s):  
Public Discourse ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Second Tier ◽  
The Government ◽  
The One ◽  
Simplified Procedure

The Hungarian administrative law has been significantly impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic. Several rules – which were introduced during the state of danger based on the epidemic situation – have been incorporated into the Hungarian legal system. The administrative procedural law has been influenced by the epidemic transformation. However, the rules on e-administration have not been reformed significantly (due to the digitalisation reforms of the last years), but the rules on administrative licenses and permissions have been amended. The priority of the general code on administrative procedure has been weakened: new, simplified procedure and regime have been introduced. The local self-governance has been impacted by the reforms. The transformation has had two, opposite trends. On the one hand, the Hungarian administrative system became more centralised during the last year: municipal revenues and task performance have been partly centralised. The Hungarian municipal system has been concentrated, as well. The role of the second-tier government, the counties (megye), has been strengthened by the establishment of the special economic (investment) zones. On the other hand, the municipalities could be interpreted as a ‘trash can’ of the Hungarian public administration: they received new, mainly unpopular competences on the restrictions related to the pandemic. Although these changes have been related to the current epidemic situation, it seems, that the ‘legislative background’ of the pandemic offered an opportunity to the central government to pass significant reforms. From 2021 a new phenomenon can be observed: the state of danger has remained, but the majority of the restrictions have been terminated by the Government of Hungary. Therefore, the justification of the state of danger during the summer of 2021 became controversial in Hungarian public discourse.

scholarly journals ASSESSMENT REGARDING THE NULLITY OR INVALIDITY OF A GOVERNMENTAL ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION AND/OR ACTION

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-50
Author(s):  
Hidayat Pratama Putra
Keyword(s):  
Research Method ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Abuse Of Power ◽  
Related Literature ◽  
Government Administration ◽  
Secondary Sources ◽  
The Government ◽  
The One ◽  
Legal Consequences

The concept of Nullity (Nietigheid) is very important in administrative law because of the validity of a government act (bestuurshandelingen) either in the form of a decision (besluit) or in the form of an action (Feitelijk Handelingen) depends on the existence of the doctrine regarding Nullity. Since when is a decision declared invalid, and what are the legal consequences, if this is answered by the existence of this Nullity doctrine. Law No. 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration, has more or less changed the paradigm regarding the teachings of annulment from the one held by administrative law experts in Indonesia, especially with regard to the doctrine of abuse of power, which is regulated in several articles in the Government Administration Law. In this paper, it is found that government decisions and/or actions that are canceled or declared invalid have different consequences. This paper uses a normative juridical research method, namely using secondary data in the form of primary and secondary sources of law, both applicable laws and related literature.

scholarly journals New Paradigm Of Abuse Of Power On Discretion After Government Administration Act

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hidayat Pratama Putra
Keyword(s):  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
The State ◽  
New Paradigm ◽  
Abuse Of Power ◽  
Legal Provision ◽  
Government Administration ◽  
State Administration ◽  
The Government

Discretion is one of government actions that are very vulnerable to abuse of power in it. Law Number 30 Year 2014 on Government Administration as a legal provision in the field of state administration currently regulates in detail related to discretion, abuse of power, and abuse of power in discretion in particular. This paper discusses the regulation related to abuse of power that has a paradigm shift based on Law Number 30 Year 2014 on Government Administration and benchmark it in discretion. The Government Administration Act builds a new paradigm of abuse of power by interpreting broadly abuse of power comprising beyond authority, misuse of authority and arbitrary. There are several indicators to show that discretion can be considered as abuse of power, namely: • Contrary to the Act and/or the principle of good governance; Notwithstanding the purpose of discretion or the purpose of the state in general; Breaking discretionary procedures; Beyond the Authority (onbevoegdheid); And/or has no basis of authority.

scholarly journals PERGESERAN KOMPETENSI PERADILAN TATA USAHA NEGARA PASCA DIUNDANGKAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 30 TAHUN 2014 TENTANG ADMINISTRASI PEMERINTAHAN

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 200-207
Author(s):  
Iskatrinah Iskatrinah
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Government Administration ◽  
Role Of The State ◽  
State Administration ◽  
Approach Method ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government

One of the characteristics of State Administrative Law, among others, states that the field of state administrative law is difficult to codify because its arrangements are scattered in various institutions / institutions / government agencies. However, difficult does not mean it can not be done. The promulgation of Law 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration proves that there has been a codification of the law governing the practice of government administration, therefore it is expected to be able to reinforce the existence of the State Administrative Court in administrative law enforcement. Through this paper, the author tries to explain the authority of the State Administrative Court after the Government Administration Act. This research uses the Normative Juridical Approach method, by tracing, examining the object of research through its legal principles, through its laws and legal history, which is used to find out the rationale, background of the legislation that is the object of research, namely the Law 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration. So at the end of this study it can be concluded that the enactment of Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning Government Administration has increasingly complemented and strengthened the role of the State Administrative Court in the order of administrative law in Indonesia, and as a legal political basis for law enforcement in state administration

scholarly journals Implementasi Prinsip-Prinsip Good Governance dalam Memajukan Kabupaten Jember

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 302-310
Author(s):  
Moh Anwar Nuris
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
The State ◽  
Government Administration ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Many

In realizing good governance in government, we need a foundation to make it happened. Good governance is the basis for the value of government administration which is oriented towards restoring the community's dignity in order to rebuild the image of the government as a just servant. This was accompanied by the increasing demands for democracy, recognition of human rights, which resulted in demands for management characterized by good governance. The results show that: (1) The application of the principles of good governance in the Jember Regency Government is still insufficient because of the many violations committed by the government (2) the process of applying the principles of good governance in advancing Jember Regency is still lacking due to the many violations committed by the government. Jember Regency Government in carrying out alleged violations of statutory regulations. Starting from the management of the State Civil Apparatus (ASN), the use of government apparatus authority, and the management of regional finances which have a massive impact on ASN and the community so that the impeachment of the Regent of Jember by the Regional House of Representatives (DPRD Jember) affects the implementation of government in Jember Regency so that it has an impact on the performance of the Regent of Jember. (3). Factors that hinder the preparation of the RAPBD in implementing the principles of good governance in Jember Regency.

scholarly journals Powers and Limits of State during COVID-19 Pandemic: a Critical Appraisal

Yuridika ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 663
Author(s):  
Iwan Satriawan ◽  
Devi Seviyana
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The State ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Power Limits ◽  
The Government

The research aims to analyze the power and limit of the state and whether Indonesia has properly adopted the concept of powers and limits during state emergency of COVID-19 pandemic. The method of the research was normative legal research which used statute and case approach were employed for data analysis. The result shows that a state may apply some types of power in an emergency condition. However, in using its powers, the government must consider principle of limits in a state of emergency. In fact, Indonesia does not properly adopt the balance of power and limit in the state of emergency during COVID-19 pandemic. It is true that the government may take actions to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the State cannot exceed the limitations of using powers in accordance with state emergency principle. There was a tendency to exceed the limits by the State during the pandemic. The State has violated some state of emergency principles during COVID-19 pandemic such as temporary, the rule of law, necessity, proportionally, intangibility, constitutionalism, harmony, and supervision. The research recommends that the Government and the House of Representatives (the DPR) in the future should obey the state of emergency principles, particularly in terms of state power limits to respect constitutional principles and rule of law. In addition, individuals, groups of people, or organizations may submit judicial review of laws or regulations that violate the state of emergency principles in handling pandemic in the light of protecting the fundamental rights of citizens.

An Overview of Good Governance

2019 ◽  
pp. 15-24
Author(s):  
Henk Addink
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Institutional Framework ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Administrative Legislation ◽  
The Government

Good governance is needed because of legislative gaps, prevention of corruption, maladministration, and mismanagement, and fragmentation of administrative law norms. The concept of good governance has been developed in addition to aspects which can already be found in the rule of law and democracy concepts but are also related to the institutional framework of the government. The term ‘government’ is used for all the powers in the state; the administration is only one of these powers. These powers must fulfil certain norms, principles which sometimes are unwritten and developed by the judiciary or the ombudsman but more and more codified in the frame of the general (administrative) legislation. All the institutions of the government are involved in the development of these principles of good governance. There is not only a separation between the powers of the state, but more and more there are interactions between these powers in the development of principles of good governance and, hence, there is a balance between these principles. Therefore, there are different producers and sources of good governance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document