scholarly journals Kekuatan Pembuktian Fotokopi Surat yang Tidak Dapat Dicocokkan dengan Aslinya dalam Perkara Perdata

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 323-352
Author(s):  
Devina Puspita Sari
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
District Court ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
High Court ◽  
Original Letter ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Opposing Party ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Valid Evidence

The photocopy acceptable in the court if it matched with the original letter and the strength of that photocopy is the same as the original letter. However, sometimes the original letter has been lost so that it cannot be shown at trial. This paper discusses whether a photocopy that cannot be matched with the original letter can be accepted in the civil procedural law and if it can be accepted how the strength of it, then the discussion will look at the judge’s consideration in two cases related to the issue. The results of discussions are that photocopies that cannot be matched with the original letter can be accepted as evidence if the photocopy matches or is strengthened with other evidence, as the jurisprudence of Decision Nr. 112 K/Pdt/1996 and Decision Nr. 410 K/pdt/2004. The jurisprudence has been followed by similar cases, which is the Decision of the Central Jakarta District Court Nr. 164/Pdt.G/2004/PN.Jkt.Pst jo. Decision of The Jakarta High Court Nr. 234/Pdt/2005/PT.DKI jo. Decision of The Supreme Court Nr. 1498 K/Pdt/2006 which in this case a photocopy can be accepted because it is strengthened by the recognition of the opposing party and The Pontianak District Court Nr.52/Pdt.G/2003/PN.Ptk which received a photocopy because it was strengthened with  witness testimony. The photocopy has a free power of proof (depends on the judge’s assessment). The use and assessment of the strength of the photocopy cannot be independent, but must be linked to other valid evidence. Abstrak Fotokopi surat dapat diterima dalam persidangan apabila dapat dicocokkan dengan aslinya, dan kekuatan pembuktiannya sama seperti surat aslinya. Tulisan ini membahas, dalam hal surat aslinya tidak dapat ditunjukkan di persidangan, apakah fotokopi surat dapat diterima dalam pembuktian hukum acara perdata, dan, apabila dapat diterima, bagaimanakah kekuatan pembuktiannya. Artikel ini menunjukkan, fotokopi surat yang tidak dapat dicocokkan dengan aslinya dapat diterima sebagai alat bukti surat jika bersesuaian atau dikuatkan dengan alat bukti lain, sebagaimana Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 112 K/Pdt/1996 dan Putusan Nomor 410 K/pdt/2004 yang telah menjadi yurisprudensi. Yurisprudensi ini telah diikuti dalam perkara serupa, yaitu dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat Nomor 164/Pdt.G/2004/PN.Jkt.Pst jo. Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Jakarta Nomor 234/Pdt/2005/PT.DKI jo. Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1498 K/Pdt/2006, di mana dalam perkara ini fotokopi surat dapat diterima karena dikuatkan dengan pengakuan pihak lawan. Demikian juga dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Pontianak Nomor 52/Pdt.G/2003/PN.Ptk, yang menerima fotokopi surat yang tidak dapat dicocokkan dengan aslinya karena dikuatkan dengan alat bukti keterangan saksi. Dengan demikian, fotokopi surat memiliki kekuatan pembuktian yang bebas, artinya diserahkan kepada penilaian hakim. Penggunaan dan penilaian kekuatan pembuktian fotokopi tersebut tidak dapat berdiri sendiri, tetapi harus dikaitkan dengan alat bukti lainnya yang sah.  

scholarly journals Urgensi Pembentukan Peradilan Khusus Pemilu dalam rangka Mewujudkan Integritas Pemilu

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Iwan Rois ◽  
Ratna Herawati
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Research Method ◽  
District Court ◽  
Election Law ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
High Court ◽  
Provincial Level ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
General Elections

This study aims to analyze the need to establish a special election court which has the authority to solve various election law cases in order to realize elections with integrity; and analyzing the formulation of election special justice in order to realize the integrity of the election. The research method used is the method of normative legal research and the implementation of this research collects data from various sources in order to get an answer to the issues that have been formulated. The results of the study shows that  the purpose of the need for the formation of special judicial elections; First, to meet the growing demands of increasingly complex justice in society and more election law enforcement so as to realize the integrity of the elections; Second, To handle the election law cases quickly and simply so as to obey the integrity of the election. Formulation; First, the election special justice to be able to work quickly and simply in handling election law cases, domiciled at the central and provincial level, then entering the District Court or the High Court; Secondly, the Guidelines for the election special judicial law shall be based on Supreme Court Regulation Number 4 Year 2017 on Procedures for the Settlement of Administrative Offenses of the General Elections in the Supreme Court. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis perlunya membentuk peradilan khusus pemilu yang mempunyai kewenangan menyelesaikan berbagai perkara hukum pemilu agar terwujud pemilu yang berintegritas; dan menganalisis formulasi pembentukan peradilan khusus pemilu dalam rangka mewujudkan integritas pemilu. Metode penelitian yang digunakan ialah metode penelitian hukum normatif dan pelaksanaan dari penelitian ini mengumpulkan bahan hukum dari berbagai sumber guna mendapatkan suatu jawaban atas pokok-pokok permasalahan yang telah dirumuskan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tujuan perlunya pembentukan peradilan khusus pemilu; Pertama, Untuk memenuhi tuntutan perkembangan akan keadilan yang semakin kompleks dalam masyarakat dan lebih penegakan hukum pemilu sehingga mewujudkan integritas pemilu; Kedua, Untuk menangani perkara hukum pemilu dengan cepat dan sederhana sehingga mewudkan integritas pemilu. Formulasi; Pertama, Peradilan khusus pemilu agar bisa bekerja cepat dan sederhana dalam menangani perkara hukum pemilu, berkedudukan di tingkat pusat dan provinsi, selanjutnya masuk pada Pengadilan Negeri atau Pengadilan Tinggi; Kedua, Pedoman beracara pada peradilan khusus pemilu berdasarkan pada Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2017 tentang Tata Cara Penyelesaian Pelanggaran Administratif Pemilihan Umum Di Mahkamah Agung.

PENEGAKAN HUKUM OLEH HAKIM AGUNG REPUBLIK INDONESIA DALAM MENANGANI KASASI PERKARA KARTEL PUTUSAN KPPU YANG MENGGUNAKAN ALAT BUKTI TIDAK LANGSUNG (INDIRECT EVIDENCE)

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-101
Author(s):  
Fransiska Lestari Simanjuntak
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Indirect Evidence ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Problem ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Is Research ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Valid Evidence ◽  
The Republic

Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) is an institution authorized to handle unfair business competition violation. In fact, in several KPPU decisions it was revealed that KPPU prioritizes indirect evidence in handling cartel cases in Indonesia. KPPU's decision is not final and binding. Business actors who do not accept the decision of KPPU may file an objection at the District Court. The parties who do not accept the decision of the district court, may file an appeal in the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The type of research is used in this research is normative legal research, that is research done by reviewing the rules of law applicable or applied to a certain legal problem. The result of the research shows that in the Supreme Court appeal, KPPU's decision was upheld and canceled by Supreme Court to KPPU's decision uses indirect evidence in handling cartel case. The basis of consideration of the Supreme Court Justices ruling the KPPU's decision in the case of the tire cartel and the cement cartel is the Chief Justice accepting and acknowledging the indirect evidence as valid evidence, since the evidence is sufficient and logical evidence, and there is no evidence the more powerful that can weaken the indirect evidence. While the consideration of the Supreme Court Judge overturning the KPPU's decision in the case of cartel fuel surcharger is not accepting and acknowledging indirect evidence as valid evidence, because the evidence is insufficient and illogical, and there is stronger evidence that can weaken the tool indirect evidence

Singapore

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire van Overdijk ◽  
Terence Seah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
State Courts ◽  
District Court ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Court Order ◽  
High Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Mental Capacity Act ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Singapore is a common law country. Judicial power is vested in the Supreme Court (High Court and Court of Appeal) and the State Courts (District Courts and Magistrates’ Courts). Pursuant to the Supreme Court of Judicature (Transfer of Mental Capacity Proceedings to District Court) Order 2010, proceedings under the Mental Capacity Act (cap 177A, 2010 Rev Ed) (‘MCA’) are now first heard by the District Court.

scholarly journals THE PROBLEMATICS OF EXECUTION LAW AGAINST NON-EXECUTABLE JUDGMENTS AND COMPARISONS WITH MALAYSIAN LAW

JURISDICTIE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 244
Author(s):  
Bambang Sugeng Ariadi Subagyono ◽  
Ghansham Anand
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Subject ◽  
Civil Case ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Laws

<p>In public courts, the litigation of civil case is under civil law procedure. This is a legal regulation to maintain material civil laws. The procedural law is also a way to file a particular civil case to civil court and to organize judges’ ways in making judgment toward legal subject. Civil law procedure prevents any vigilante actions that creates public legal order. Judiciaries provide protection for legal subject in preserving their rights and prevent any arbitrary actions. After case investigation process set under procedural law, a court judgment is made to judge and solve case. Legal actions are subsequently conducted to reach fixed legal judgment (inkracht van gewijsde). Some executions for civil cases in Indonesia is suspended since the object is different from reality or non-executable. Furthermore, civil case judgment is sometimes contradictory to criminal cases, although the objects are similar. Either litigant and/or defendant files request to the Supreme Court to have a legal protection or the chairman of district court requests for an instruction from the Supreme Court, may suspend court judgment. Therefore, the implementation of court judgments with legal power is still undeniably problematic. If the execution is suspended or not allowed, it may disadvantage “the justice seekers”; public society. The suspended or non-executable judgment should be immediately addressed on its implementation, instead of its law.</p><p><br />Di pengadilan umum, proses kasus perdata berada dalam prosedur hukum perdata. Ini adalah peraturan hukum untuk mempertahankan hukum sipil material. Undang-Undang prosedural ialah cara mengajukan kasus perdata ke pengadilan sipil dan mengatur cara hakim memutuskan subjek hukum. Prosedur hukum perdata bertujuan mencegah tindakan hakim-sendiri sehingga tercipta tatanan hukum publik. Peradilan memberikan perlindungan bagi subjek hukum dalam melestarikan haknya dan mencegah kesewenang-wenangan. Setelah proses penyelidikan kasus sebagaimana diatur dalam hukum prosedural, putusan pengadilan dibuat untuk menilai dan memecahkan kasus. Tindakan hukum selanjutnya dilakukan hingga mendapat keputusan hukum tetap (inkracht van gewijsde). Beberapa putusan kasus perdata Indonesia ditangguhkan karena objek berbeda dari kenyataan atau tidak dapat dieksekusi. Selanjutnya, putusan kasus perdata terkadang bertentangan dengan kasus pidana, meskipun objeknya sama. Baik penggugat dan/atau terdakwa mengajukan permintaan ke Mahkamah Agung untuk memiliki perlindungan hukum atau ketua dari pengadilan distrik meminta instruksi dari Mahkamah Agung, bisa menangguhkan keputusan pengadilan. Karenanya, pelaksanaan putusan pengadilan dengan kekuatan hukum masih bermasalah. Jika eksekusi ditangguhkan atau tidak diizinkan, tentu dapat merugikan “para pencari keadilan”; masyarakat umum. Putusan yang ditangguhkan atau tidak dapat dieksekusi harus segera ditangani pada pelaksanaannya, bukan hukumnya.</p>

scholarly journals Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Alasan Penemuan Novum Palsu Sebagai Dasar Peninjauan Kembali Kedua dalam Perkara Perdata

AL-HUKAMA ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-148
Author(s):  
Ulil Manaqib
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Civil Case ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Opposing Party ◽  
The Supreme Court

This article discusses the juridical analysis of the reasons for the discovery of a fake novum as the basis of a second review in a civil case. This study aims to answer the question of how are the reasons for the discovery of a fake novum as the basis for a second review in a civil case? and how are the legal analysis of a reason for the discovery of a fake novum as a the basis for a second review in a civil case. The reason for receiving the second review in the civil case is based on the discovery of a novum which was declared false by the Criminal Judge of the Bandung District Court that has inkracht, is a reason that falls within the criteria of Article 67 letter (a) which reads: “If the decision is based on a lie or a ruse the opposing party that is known after the case has been decided or based on evidence which is later declared to be false by the criminal judge”, is not classified as a reason for finding novum or the reason there are two conflicting judicial decisions. Secondly, the second review in the pedata and criminal case is only limited to the reason that there are two Judicial Decisions that are interrelated with one another (SEMA Number 10 Year 2009), so in addition to these reasons, the Supreme Court has never issued a policy related to the second mechanism Judicial Review, including on the grounds that a novum has been legally and convincingly found false by a public court.

scholarly journals PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI PEMENANG LELANG OBYEK HAK TANGGUNGAN DARI GUGATAN PERDATA PIHAK KETIGA

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-49
Author(s):  
Firman Angga
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
District Court ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
High Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Winning Bidder

In practice, the auction, although carried out in accordance with applicable regulations, is sometimes still sued in the District Court, the High Court even to the Supreme Court. The results of the supreme court's decision were canceled. Regarding this matter, of course the auction winner is very disadvantaged. The problem to be known in this scientific work is a form of legal protection against the winning bidder for the execution of Mortgage, and how to settle if there are obstacles in the implementation of the auction. This scientific work uses a normative juridical method with a statute approach, a conceptual approach and a case approach. The results obtained from this study are that the form of legal protection for auction winners who have good intentions is: 1) Submitting resistance (Derden Verzet) to the execution of the verdict. This resistance is submitted to the Chairperson of the District Court whose confiscation occurs in his jurisdiction, both verbally and in writing, 2) Submitting a request for legal protection for the decision to cancel the auction and re-execute. The method of settlement if there is an obstacle in the implementation of the auction for the Mortgage by means of the debtor paying the amount of debt and other costs as stated in the contents of the decision if the obstacles arise during the auction. Whereas the method of settlement after the auction, is the creditor as the buyer and the winner of the auction of the Mortgage resistance (derden verset) by suing the debtor to court with a claim for compensation for all costs of conducting the auction that has been carried out and canceled by the court. Furthermore, Bank Rakyat Indonesia as the creditor holds the default debtor accountable to immediately fulfill the defaulted debt by re-executing

scholarly journals AKIBAT HUKUM PEMBATALAN AKTA JUAL BELI (AJB) ATAS TANAH OLEH PEJABAT PEMBUAT AKTA TANAH (PPAT) DALAM PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 888/K/PDT/2016

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 253
Author(s):  
Livia Clarista ◽  
Endang Pandamdari
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
High Court ◽  
Original State ◽  
Legal Standing ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Consequences ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Buying and selling is a process of transferring rights of land carried out by making a sale and purchase deed by a land deed official. Therefore, the procedure must be in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations to produce a valid deed and can be used to transfer the land rights. In this case, there was a mismatch in the procedure for making land sale and purchase deeds carried out by land deed official. This caused a legal defect in the deed which was then supported by a statement from the District Court Verdict Number 381/Pdt.G/2014/PN/Bdg. and the Bandung High Court with Decision Verdict 451/PDT/2015/ PT BDG., where both of them grant the plaintiff's claim, namely land deed official itself. However, the Supreme Court Judges considered that land deed official did not have a legal standing in filing a claim because it was deemed not to have legal interests in the sale and purchase deed. The Supreme Court Judges in Verdict Number 888 / PDT / 2016 canceled the previous court decision. This resulted in the deed returning to its original state. However, the deed can then only be canceled by the parties in it, but the cancellation also can only be done if both parties agree. While the legal consequences of the land deed official issuing the sale and purchase deed are the acceptance of sanctions in the form of temporary and permanent dismissals.

scholarly journals ANALISIS PERBUATAN MELAWAN HUKUM DALAM AKTA PERJANJIAN PENGIKATAN JUAL BELI (PPJB) TANAH ANTARA KOKO PURNOMO SANTOSO DENGAN PT. INTAN PLAZA ADIKA (Studi Kasus: Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 17/K/Pdt/2016)

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 561
Author(s):  
Haryati Widjaja ◽  
Hanafi Tanawijaya
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
District Court ◽  
High Court ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Agreement Condition

Contract or agreement is an act pursuant to which one or more individuals commit themselves to one another. Based on the system that chapter III civil code used, chapter III civil code used opened system it means that every people can make an agreement with everybody and about anythings but the contract or agreement must be appropriate with terms of agreement and agreement principles. There are two kinds of agreement, first nominaat agreement, nominaat agreement is an agreement that already have a regulted in law. The second is innominaat agreement, innominaat agreement is an agreement that not regulated in law. condition sale and purchase agreement is innominaat agreement. Condition sale and purchase agreement was appeared because of freedom of contract. Eventhough condition sale and purchase agreement was made because freedom of contract but it must be appropriate with terms of agreement and agreement principles. If the agreement put aside the agreement principles and legal principles, the agreement can be null and void or can be canceled. In Koko Purnomo Santoso’s case, he already been punished for 4 years because, Koko sold lands that belongs to someone else and gave the wrong information in authentic deed. But, Intan Plaza Adika still want to continue the agreement because Intan Plaza Adika is a purchaser with good faith. The district court and high court agree with Intan Plaza Adika. But the supreme court said the opposite with district and high court, the supreme court said the agreement is null and void.

scholarly journals PUTUSAN ULTRA PETITA DALAM KASUS PEMBUNUHAN DI PENGADILAN NEGERI JAKARTA TIMUR

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-66
Author(s):  
Denty Suci Mareta Femylia ◽  
Muchammad Chasani ◽  
Muchammad Chasani
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
High Court ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Rulings ◽  
Case Number

Putusan Pengadilan Nomor 537/Pid/B/2007/PN.Jkt.Tim memutuskan terdakwa telah melakukan kejahatan berat berupa pembunuhan dengan sengaja. Melihat kejahatan yang dilakukannya, maka pantas baginya mendapatkan hukuman yang setimpal yaitu 15 tahun. Masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah apa yang menjadi dasar pertimbangan seorang hakim dalam memutus perkara seperti nomor putusan 537/Pid/B/2007/PN.Jkt.Tim, dan bagaimana penerapan putusannya dalam kasus ini. Metode penelitian hukum yang digunakan adalah yuridis sosiologis. Sasaran dari penelitian adalah norma-norma hukum positif yang mengatur tentang putusan ultra petita khususnya di Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Timur. Hasil Penelitian yang diperoleh, bahwa Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Timur memutus ultra petita karena dalam kasus ini, Jaksa menuntut terdakwa dengan menggunakan Pasal 338 KUHP dengan ancaman hukumannya adalah 14 tahun sedangkan hakim dalam vonisnya menggunakan Pasal 340 KUHP dengan menjatuhkan hukuman kepada terdakwa yaitu dengan 15 tahun penjara. Penerapannya adalah terdakwa mengajukan Peninjauan Kembali ke Mahkamah Agung dengan hasil putusannya adalah terdakwa Ferry Surya Prakasa divonis dengan 8 tahun penjara. Simpulan yang diperoleh dari penelitian ini adalah putusan majelis hakim atas Perkara Nomor: 537/Pid/B/2007/PN.Jkt.Tim, bahwa hakim seharusnya dapat memutus perkara tidak dari faktor yuridisnya saja melainkan dapat memutus perkara tersebut dengan memperhatikan dari faktor nonyuridisnya. Terkait dengan penerapannya bahwa terdakwa dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri, Pengadilan Tinggi dan Putusan Mahkamah Agung telah memutus 15 tahun penjara dan dalam peninjauan kembali divonis dengan 8 tahun penjara.Judgment of the Court Number 537 / Pid / B / 2007 / PN.Jkt.Tim decided the defendant had committed a serious crime of intentional murder. Seeing the crime he committed, it was fitting for him to get a 15-year sentence. The problem to be studied in this research are what is the basic consideration of a judge in deciding case such as decision number 537 / Pid / B / 2007 / PN.Jkt.Tim, and how the application of decision in this case. The approach used in the research is socio legal research. The objectives of the research are the poitive legal norms that regulate the Ultra petita Decision especially in the East Jakarta District Court. The result of the research shows that the East Jakarta District Court made decision of ultra petita verdict exceeded the prosecutor's demand, because in this case, the prosecutor demanded the defendant using Article 338 of the Criminal Code with the penalty of 14 years While the judge in his sentence using Article 340 of the Criminal Code by sentencing the defendant to 15 years imprisonment. Its application is the defendant filed a Judicial Review to the Supreme Court with the result of the verdict is defendant Ferry Surya Prakasa with 8 years in prison. The conclusion of this research is the decision of the panel of judges on the Case Number: 537 / Pid / B / 2007 / PN.Jkt.Tim, that the judge should be able to decide the case not from juridical factor but can decide the case by considering from the nonyuridis factor. In relation to its application that the defendant in the District Court, High Court and Supreme Court rulings have terminated 15 years of imprisonment and are under review with a term of 8 years imprisonment.

scholarly journals Ideal Execution of Civil, Cases Based on Principles of Justice to create a Simple and Low-cost Judiciary

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 70-77
Author(s):  
Irma Garwan
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
District Court ◽  
High Court ◽  
Civil Case ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Discovery Method ◽  
The Ideal

Execution of civil case decision at the normative and implementative levels often causes juridical, sociological, and philosophical problems. The juridical problems may arise since the norms that regulate execution are often too short, simple, and not detailed; this could also cause problems at the implementative level. On top of that, the problems may be caused by a non-executable legally-binding decision (inkracht van gewijs de zaak). The objectives of the study are to investigate the ideal implementation of execution for the winning party to be in accordance with the provisions in Article 2 para. (4) and Article 4 para. (2) of Law No. 48/2009 concerning Judicial Power. The study employs a juridical, normative, and historical approach, as well as an in-concreto law discovery method. The study involved secondary data acquired from the review of relevant legal literatures. The data were analyzed and presented qualitatively. The results reveal that the principles of simple, fast, and low-cost judiciary is actualized if, in practice, the District Court Chief does not have to wait for the High Court Chief’s approval. Therefore, the Supreme Court shall prepare personnel (who have been appointed as Civil Servants) as the instruments to carry out the execution of legally-binding decisions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document