THE ANTINOMY OF FICTIVE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN INDONESIAN STATUTE

  • Addinul Haq Yaqub Faculty of Law Airlangga University
    (ID)
  • Dhanitya Putra Prawira Faculty of Law Airlangga University
    (ID)
  • Muhammad Arief Syahroni Faculty of Law Airlangga University
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24252/jurisprudentie.v6i1.7986

Abstract

The main issue in this paper is legal uncertainty caused by the occurrence of antinomy on the Issuance of Fictive State Administration Decision by Administrative Officials. The results of the analysis show: First, the legal regulation concerning the Fictive State Administrative Decision by Administrative Officials which causes differences in paradigms and legal positions between Article 3 of UU PTUN with Article 53 of the Administration Law should be related to the type of decision based on its nature. If the Fictive State Administrative Decision is constitutive, then the decision must be based on UU PTUN, whereas if the Fictive State Administrative Decision is declarative, then the decision must be situated under the Administration Law. Second, the legal implication related to the differences in legal regulation provides a gap for Administrative Officialsto trigger unrealized legal protection to society. The difference in legal regulation also manifests legal uncertainty in the judicial process because it can cause confusion for judges to use measurement pointsin deciding state administrative disputes.

Keywords: State Administrative Court; Administration Law; Legal Regulation; Constitutive; Declarative.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aminuddin Ilmar, 2012, Hak Menguasai Negara: dalam privatisasi BUMN,

Kencana Prenada Media Group : Jakarta.

, 2013, Hukum Tata Pemerintahan, Identitas : Makassar .

B. Arief Sidharta, 2011, ‘Negara Hukum Yang Berkeadilan’ Kumpulan Pemikiran dalam Rangka Purna Bhakti Prof. Dr. Bagir Manan, Asas Hukum, Kaidah Hukum, Sistem Hukum, dan Penemuan Hukum, PSKN FH UNPAD : Bandung.

Jan Remmelink, 2003, Hukum Pidana: Komentar atas Pasal-pasal Terpenting dari Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana Belanda dan Padanannya dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana Indonesia, PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama : Jakarta.

Nuryanto A. Daim, 2014, Hukum Administrasi : Perbandingan Penyelesaian Maladministrasi oleh Ombudsman dan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara, Laksbang Justitia : Surabaya.

Peter Mahmud Marzuki, 2011, Penelitian Hukum, Pranada Media Group : Jakarta. Philipus M Hadjon et.,al., 2005, Pengantar Hukum Administrasi Indonesia,

Gadjah Mada University Press : Yogyakarta.

Ridwan HR, 2014, Hukum Administrasi Negara, RajaGrafindo Persada : Jakarta. Zairin Harahap, 2014, Hukum Acara Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara, RajaGrafindo

Persada : Jakarta.

Journal:

Ely Kusumastuti, ‘ Penetapan Tersangka Sebagai Obyek Praperadilan’ (2018) 33 Yuridika.

Zainal Arifin Mochtar, ‘Antinomi dalam Peraturan Perundang-undangan di Indonesia’ (2015) Vol. 1 Hasanuddin Law Review.

Sites :

Yance Arizona, ‘Apa Itu Kepastian Hukum’ See at

Published
2019-06-29
How to Cite
Yaqub, A. H., Prawira, D. P., & Syahroni, M. A. (2019). THE ANTINOMY OF FICTIVE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN INDONESIAN STATUTE. Jurisprudentie : Jurusan Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Syariah Dan Hukum, 6(1), 40-55. https://doi.org/10.24252/jurisprudentie.v6i1.7986
Issue
Vol. 6 No. 1 (2019)
Section
Volume 6 Nomor 1 Juni 2019

Once an article was published in the journal, the author(s) are:

  • to retain copyright and grant to the journal right licensed under Creative Commons License Attribution that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship.
  • permitted to publish their work online in third parties as it can lead wider dissemination of the work, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal
  • continue to be the copyright owner and allow the journal to publish the article with the CC BY-NC-SA license
  • receiving a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) of the work.
Abstract viewed = 190 times