scholarly journals REFORMULASI PERBUATAN MELANGGAR HUKUM OLEH BADAN ATAU PEJABAT PEMERINTAHAN DALAM KONTEKS KOMPETENSI ABSOLUT PERADILAN TATA USAHA NEGARA

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agus Budi Susilo
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The State ◽  
Strict Sense ◽  
Administrative State ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Effectiveness And Efficiency ◽  
The Law ◽  
Level Government

Agency or government officials have broad authority in implementing government affairs. Broad authority was likely to be abused , causing loss and injustice in the society as well as lower level government officials, therefore there must be other institutions that control it. Based on the theory of triad politics, the executive is politically controlled by the legislature and are legally controlled by the judiciary, because the agency or government officials running the executive function, which controls the judiciary juridical is the State Administrative Court ( Judicial TUN ). TUN judicial control by the Court at this time is so vague, because it is limited by the law on the Judiciary TUN revised twice (Law No. . 5 of 1986 which was later revised by Law No. . 9 of 2004 and Act No. . 51 of 2009 ) . Testing is limited to understanding the Administrative Court Administrative Decision ( KTUN ) in the strict sense. It can be said that the law on the Judiciary TUN philosophically opposed to the purpose of the establishment TUN Judicial institutions, namely resolve administrative disputes in a broad sense. Therefore, based on futuristic ideas that need to be explored further in the TUN Courts abolut authority to exercise control or testing for unlawful acts committed government agencies or officials. All this is nothing else aims to reposition back nature of administrative law enforcement by the state Judicial TUN and simplify all the administrative state dispute settlement based on the principles of effectiveness and efficiency. Keyword; Deeds Against the Law, Government Officials, Administrative Court

Countermeasures

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joaquín Alcaide Fernández
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Pollution Prevention ◽  
Physical Space ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Self Help ◽  
The Law

As used in modern practice, judicial decisions, and literature, the term “countermeasures” covers the main part of the classical subject of “reprisals,” to which the first monographs of international law were devoted in the 14th century (B. de Sassoferrato and G. de Legnano). Two features used to be attached to countermeasures: (a) they are unilateral or individual measures adopted directly and independently by a state that takes the law into its own hands as based on the state’s “subjective” qualification of another state’s prior act as illegal (“self-help” or “self-protection”); (b) the measures would be essentially illegal if not for the fundamental prerequisite of the “objective” existence of a prior wrongful act committed by the state against which the countermeasures are adopted, and for the fulfillment of other requirements, substantive limits, and procedural conditions. In legal literature sometimes countermeasures not only include these measures but also those called “retorsion”: these are unfriendly and perhaps also retaliatory but not illegal irrespective of the conduct of the state these measures are taken against. The measures of retorsion have fallen outside the scope of the International Law Commission’s (ILC’s) work on international responsibility. On the other hand, countermeasures are not always differentiated from “sanctions” (or institutionalized coercive measures), and from unilateral measures to enforce “sanctions.” The development of judicial and institutional processes for furthering compliance and enforcement in general international law has not yet excluded such unsatisfactory legal remedies, as states’ practice and opinio juris (or the judicial decisions) prove. Legal scholars are also practically unanimous to recognize the admissibility of law enforcement through countermeasures, whether they consider it expressly or implicitly an exception or a right/faculty (or duty) of states. And so, this recognition is extended to international organizations. The ILC has taken note of all that, having contributed to the more precise development and definition of the countermeasures’ legal regime. The debates have been mainly on the conditions and restrictions to neutralize or reduce the risk of abuse, less on the pros and cons of the codification of that regime. Concerning the legality and legitimacy of countermeasures, there are other requirements related to, inter alia, their object (law-enforcement, not punishment), necessity and proportionality, temporary and reversible character, or the other obligations where fulfillment cannot be suspended as a countermeasure, all of them addressed by the ILC’s draft articles on responsibility. Alongside the recurrent renewal of the discussion relating to the illegality of reprisals/countermeasures involving the use of force, there are probably two other controversial issues, as highlighted during ILC’s work: the interrelationship between recourse to means of dispute settlement and to countermeasures and, in relation to erga omnes obligations and peremptory norms, the entitlement (right or duty) of noninjured states to adopt individual countermeasures. Although the term “countermeasure” has been used since at least 1923, as a general concept, referring to domains or disciplines with little or no relation to international law (medicine, materials or electromagnetic engineering, pollution prevention, defense and weapons), in recent years some practice and several academic writings attempt to adapt existing international law, including the law governing the self-help resources available to the victim states (self-defense, retaliation, regression, and the right to take countermeasures), from the kinetic (physical) space to a new one (“the fifth domain”), namely, the cyber domain.

PERSINGGUNGAN KEWENANGAN MENGADILI PENYALAHGUNAAN DISKRESI ANTARA PENGADILAN TUN DAN PENGADILAN TIPIKOR / INTERCEPTION OF JUSTICE AUTHORITY OF DISCRETION ABUSE BETWEEN ADMINISTRATION COURT AND CORRUPTION COURTS

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 213
Author(s):  
Budi Suhariyanto
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
State Finance ◽  
The Law ◽  
To Receive

Diskresi sebagai wewenang bebas, keberadaannya rentan akan disalahgunakan. Penyalahgunaan diskresi yang berimplikasi merugikan keuangan negara dapat dituntutkan pertanggungjawabannya secara hukum administrasi maupun hukum pidana. Mengingat selama ini peraturan perundang-undangan tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi tidak merumuskan secara rinci yang dimaksudkan unsur menyalahgunakan kewenangan maka para hakim menggunakan konsep penyalahgunaan wewenang dari hukum administrasi. Problema muncul saat diberlakukannya Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 dimana telah memicu persinggungan dalam hal kewenangan mengadili penyalahgunaan wewenang (termasuk diskresi) antara Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara dengan Pengadilan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Pada perkembangannya, persinggungan kewenangan mengadili tersebut ditegaskan oleh Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2015 bahwa PTUN berwenang menerima, memeriksa, dan memutus permohonan penilaian ada atau tidak ada penyalahgunaan wewenang (termasuk diskresi) dalam Keputusan dan/atau Tindakan Pejabat Pemerintahan sebelum adanya proses pidana. Sehubungan tidak dijelaskan tentang definisi dan batasan proses pidana yang dimaksud, maka timbul penafsiran yang berbeda. Perlu diadakan kesepakatan bersama dan dituangkan dalam regulasi tentang tapal batas persinggungan yang jelas tanpa meniadakan kewenangan pengujian penyalahgunaan wewenang diskresi pada Pengadilan TUN.Discretion as free authority is vulnerable to being misused. The abuse of discretion implicating the state finance may be prosecuted by both administrative and criminal law. In view of the fact that the law on corruption eradication does not formulate in detail the intended element of authority abuse, the judges use the concept of authority abuse from administrative law. Problems arise when the enactment of Law No. 30 of 2014 triggered an interception in terms of justice/ adjudicate authority on authority abuse (including discretion) between the Administrative Court and Corruption Court. In its development, the interception of justice authority is affirmed by Regulation of the Supreme Court Number 4 of 2015 that the Administrative Court has the authority to receive, examine and decide upon the appeal there is or there is no misuse of authority in the Decision and / or Action of Government Officials prior to the criminal process. That is, shortly before the commencement of the criminal process then that's when the authority of PTUN decides to judge the misuse of authority over the case. In this context, Perma No. 4 of 2015 has imposed restrictions on the authority of the TUN Court in prosecuting the abuse of discretionary authority.

Law enforcement practice of judicial authorities on tax disputes

2021 ◽  
pp. 550-563
Author(s):  
Alexandr V. Izmalkov ◽  
Alexander A. Kuznetsov ◽  
Pavel A. Kuznetsov ◽  
Ella Y. Kuzmenko
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The State ◽  
Effect Relationship ◽  
General Scientific ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Qualitative Characteristics ◽  
State Body

We analyze the law enforcement practice of judicial authorities on taxes and fees, since the Tax Code of the Russian Federation is a rather controversial regulatory legal act. Tax disputes arise both at the initiative of tax authorities and at the initiative of taxpayers. Purpose: to determine the main directions of law enforcement practice of courts in tax disputes. We use general scientific and specially legal methods as research methods. The focus is on the method of analysis. In the course of the research, we analyze the con-sideration of cases by judicial authorities on tax disputes, their quantitative and qualitative characteristics. We conclude that the emergence of disagree-ments between taxpayers and the state body when resolving the issue of the legality of their actions (inaction), as well as the legality of a non-normative legal act is the main reason for the formation of law enforcement practice in tax disputes. During the passage of all stages of the application of the law, it is also necessary to establish the existence of a cause-and-effect relationship between the actions of the taxpayer and the resulting consequences. The main points of this process go through several stages. We define the main directions of the law enforcement practice of courts in tax disputes.

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 RETURNS OF ASSETS IN CORRUPTION CRIMINAL ACTS AS ALTERNATIVE RESTORING STATE LOSSES

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-34
Author(s):  
Komang Ekayana
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The State ◽  
Recovery Model ◽  
Formal Approach ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Asset Recovery ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Law

Corrupted state assets certainly hurt the country narrowly, but also broadly where it harms the country and its people. However, the formal approach through the current criminal procedure law has not been able to recover the losses suffered by the state. In fact, state losses resulting from corruption are state assets that must be saved. Then there needs to be a new breakthrough to recover state losses through the asset recovery model. When looking at the country from the perspective of the victims, the state must obtain protection, in this case recovery from the losses suffered due to corruption. This paper examines the model of returning assets resulting from corruption in the law enforcement process that focuses on the rule of law in the 2003 UNCAC Convention and the mechanism of returning state assets in terms of Law No. 20 of 2001 concerning amendments to Law No. 31 of 1999 concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes. 

scholarly journals PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN ADVOKAT SEBAGAI GATEKEEPER DALAM KAITANNYA DENGAN TINDAK PIDANA PENCUCIAN UANG

Media Iuris ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 350
Author(s):  
Rendy Ardy Septia Yuristara
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Money Laundering ◽  
Legal Profession ◽  
The State ◽  
Professional Responsibilities ◽  
Basic Purpose ◽  
The Law

Advocates are the most vulnerable professions to be Gatekeepers in money laundering. Indeed, the advocate profession is part of the law enforcement apparatus that can contribute better in preventing money laundering activities to develop. Affirmation about the role of advocate that can suppress the occurrence of money laundering crime, that is with the issuance of PP. 43 of 2015, which places advocates as one of the reporting parties in the agenda of eradicating money laundering crime. However, the substance of the rule draws criticism from some misguided advocates in interpreting the intent and purpose of the arrangement. Moreover there are some advocates who consider that the rule is against the rules that regulate immunity rights in the profession advocate. The misinterpretation of some advocates related to the immunity rights inherent in the profession, causing the work of the advocate profession to be considered irrelevant, and not worthy of being called the nobleprofession (OfficiumNobile), But as a bad profession in integrity and promoting commercialization. In fact, the basic purpose of the arrangement of PP. 43 of 2015, which places the advocate profession as one of the reporting parties on the eradication agenda of money laundering, is a form of respect for the profession of advocate who is a noble profession, by prioritizing his professional responsibilities to the state, society and God, as well as his obligations as part of The legal profession to uphold the law and uphold the value of human rights while on duty.

scholarly journals АДМІНІСТРАТИВНО-ПРАВОВИЙ МЕХАНІЗМ РЕАЛІЗАЦІЇ ПРАВООХОРОННОЇ ФУНКЦІЇ ДЕРЖАВИ

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 218-226
Author(s):  
О. І. Безпалова
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
The State ◽  
Effective Functioning ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Mechanism

Розкрито сутність адміністративно-правового механізму реалізації правоохоронної функції держави. З'ясовано основні ознаки, характерні для адміністративно-правового ме­ханізму реалізації правоохоронної функції держави. Визначено перелік елементів, що вхо­дять до цього механізму. Обґрунтовано, що основними системоутворюючими елементами є інституційна та правова складові. Визначено основні кроки в напрямі забезпечення ефек­тивного функціонування адміністративно-правового механізму реалізації правоохоронної функції держави.   The essence of the administrative and legal mechanism for the implementation of the law enforcement functions of the state. Find out the main characteristics of an administrative and legal mechanism for the implementation of the law enforcement functions of the state. The list of items included in this mechanism. It is proved that the main elements of the backbone is the institutional and legal components. The basic steps to ensure the effective functioning of the administrative and legal mechanism for the implementation of the law enforcement functions of the state.

scholarly journals THE PEOPLE AND THE STATE AUTHORITIES: THE ANALYSIS OF THE INTERACTION AND COOPERATION IN THE THEORETICAL LEGACY V. N. LESHKOV

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 26-30
Author(s):  
Тимур Чукаев ◽  
Timur Chukaev
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
The State ◽  
First Century ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Methodological Basis ◽  
The People ◽  
General Scientific ◽  
The Law

The Article is devoted to the theoretical and legal heritage of the prominent Russian lawyer Vasily Nikolaevich Leshkov (1810–1881), his ideas about society as a subject of public administration, about the interaction of civil society and the police as subjects of the implementation of the law enforcement function. The methodological basis of the research is general scientific (historical, systemic, functional) and special (formal-legal, historical-legal, comparative-legal) methods of legal research. A theoretical legacy, V. N. Leshkov, which contemporaries did not understand, and the descendants of the forgotten, to comprehend the researchers in the twenty-first century.

scholarly journals CONCEPTS AND APPLICATION OF GOOD GOVERNANCE IN THE GOVERNMENT OF OMAR BIN ABDUL AZIZ

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-132
Author(s):  
Zul Karnaini
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Private Sector ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
The State ◽  
Umayyad Dynasty ◽  
Effectiveness And Efficiency ◽  
The Government ◽  
Good And Evil ◽  
Islamic Values

The term Good Governance (an-Nizam al-Siyasah) is an Islamic concept in the implementation of good governance according to the Qur'an and Hadith. This concept was re-emerged by UNDP in 1990 which was implemented by Umar bin Abdul Aziz during the Umayyad dynasty, in balancing a synergistic and constructive relationship between the state, the private sector and society, through the principles of good governance applied by Umar bin Abdul Aziz: 1. tawhid, 2. Trust, 3. Deliberation, 4. Justice and Law Enforcement, 5. Equality, 6. Brotherhood, 7. Human Rights (HAM), 8. Effective and Efficient, 9. Social Supervision. Umar bin Abd Aziz's principles of good governance are in line with Islamic values, such as: Allah as the highest caliph, trustworthiness, deliberation, justice, equality, brotherhood, human rights, and commanding good and evil. In comparison, UNDP and LAN Good Governance have the following principles: participation, law enforcement, transparency, equality, responsiveness, effectiveness, professionalism, supervision. The principles of good governance of Umar bin Abdul Aziz associated with maqasid sharia are; the principle of tawhid according to maqasid shari'ah in the field of muhafazah ad-din (maintaining religion), the principle of trustworthiness and effectiveness and efficiency, including the category of muhafazah al-mal (protection of property). The application of deliberation, including the category of muhafazah al-aql (preservation of reason) and brotherhood is included in the category of muhafazah al-nasl (maintaining offspring). Human Rights (HAM) are included in the category of muhafazah al-nafs (protecting the soul). in line with the maqasid shari'ah al-Syatibi. If tawhid is connected with Imam Malik's istislahi theory, then this principle includes daruriyyah (principle), while justice and law enforcement, deliberation, trust, equality, brotherhood are included in the hajiyyah category. effective, efficient, social supervision is included in the category of taksiniyah. Then how is good governance implemented and how is it related to UNDP good governance. This is the study of this treatise as material to add to the treasures of knowledge in the state Abstrak: Istilah Good Governance (an-Nizam al-Siyasah) merupakan konsep Islam dalam pelaksanaan tata kelola pemerintahan yang baik sesuai al-Qur’an dan Hadits. Konsep ini dimunculkan kembali oleh UNDP pada 1990 yang pernah dilaksanakan Umar bin Abdul Aziz pada masa dinasti Umayyah, dalam menyeimbangkan hubungan yang sinergis dan konstruktif antara negara, sektor swasta dan masyarakat, melalui  prinsip  good governance yang diterapkan Umar bin Abdul Aziz: 1. tawhid, 2. Amanah, 3. Musyawarah, 4. Keadilan dan Penegakan Hukum, 5. Persamaan, 6. Persaudaraan, 7. Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM), 8. Efektif dan Efisien, 9. Pengawasan Sosial. Prinsip-prinsip Good governance Umar bin Abd Aziz  sejalan dengan tata nilai Islam, seperti: Allah sebagai khalifah tertinggi, amanah, musyawarah, keadilan, persamaan, persaudaraan, HAM, dan amar makruf nahi munkar.  Sebagai bandingannya adalah Good Governance UNDP dan LAN memiliki prinsip sebagai berikut: partisipasi, penegakan hukum, transparansi, kesetaraan, daya tanggap, efektif, profesionalisme, pengawasan. Prinsip-prinsip good governance Umar bin Abdul Aziz diakaikan dengan maqasid syariah adalah; prinsip tawhid sesuai maqasid syari’ah bidang muhafazah ad-din (menjaga agama), prinsip amanah dan efektif serta efisien termasuk ketagori muhafazah al-mal (penjagaan harta). Penerapan musyawarah, termasuk kategori muhafazah al-aql (penjagaan akal) dan persaudaraan  termasuk kategori muhafazah al-nasl (menjaga keturunan). Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) termasuk kategori muhafazah al-nafs (menjaga jiwa). sejalan dengan maqasid syari’ah al-Syatibi. Jika dihubungkan  tawhid  dengan teori  istislahi Imam Malik maka prinsip ini termasuk daruriyyah (pokok), sementara keadilan dan penegakan hukum, musyawarah, amanah, persamaan, persaudaraan termasuk tingkatan kategori hajiyyah. efektif, efisien, pengawasan sosial termasuk kategori taksiniyah. Lalu bagaimanakah good governance ini diterapkan dan bagaimana hubungannya dengan good governance UNDP. Inilah kajian risalah ini sebagai bahan untuk menambah khazanah ilmu pengetahuan dalam bernegara. Kata Kunci: Tata Kelola, Konsep dan Aplikasi yang Baik, Pemerintahan Omar Bin Abdul Aziz

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document