Dialectics of the Urgency of Reforming The Law of State Administrative Justice as a Synthesis
Abstract
Dialectically, previously the handling and settlement of state administrative disputes used Law Number 5 of 1986 concerning the Administrative Court Law which was twice revised with Law Number 9 of 2004 and Law Number 51 of 2009 as the legal instrument of the procedure ( thesis). However, currently, the procedural law used in resolving state administrative and government administrative disputes also uses the Supreme Court Regulation instrument. This is because the Administrative Court Law Law cannot accommodate the development of material administrative law requirements and administrative law enforcement provided by sectoral laws. Apart from that, in practice, there have been changes and shifts in most of the content of procedural law (material and formal) in the Administrative Court Law. This shift was influenced by the enactment of Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration and sectoral laws which later became the basis for the formation of a Supreme Court Regulation. The two regulations later became guidelines for proceedings in the Administrative Court Law which had a paradoxical relationship. In one aspect, there is an interrelation between the law on Administrative Court Laws, the law on government administration, and the regulations of the Supreme Court, but in other aspects, it creates an antinomy of norms. Therefore, it is important in legal reform to encourage systematic thinking to synchronize and harmonize the material and formal content of the material and formal procedural laws that are unified as a synthesis.
Keywords: dialectics, harmonization of law, shifting, state administration judicial procedural lawFull Text:
PDF View
References
Berman, Harold J. 1983. Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition. Cambridge: Massachusetts and London: Harvard University Press.
BPHN. 2020. Dokumen Pembangunan Hukum Nasional Tahun 2020. Jakarta: Pohon Cahaya. https://www.bphn.go.id/data/documents/13.bukudphn.pdf.
Cotterrell, Roger. 1984. The Sociology of Law an Introduction. London: Butterwoths.
Effendi, Maftuh. 2018. Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara Indonesia Suatu Pemikiran Ke Arah Perluasan Kompetensi Pasca Amandemen Kedua Undang-Undang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara. Jurnal Hukum Dan Peradilan. 3(1). 25-36. https://doi.org/10.25216/ jhp.3.1.2014.25-36.
Elpah, Dani. 2017. Perkembangan Peradilan Administrasi Pasca Lahirnya Undang-Undang Administrasi Pemerintahan. Seminar Nasional. Surabaya: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Airlangga.
Fadli, Moh. 2021. Membangun Sistem Hukum Nasional Berbasis Nilai Pancasila. In Regulasi Yang Baik: Teori, Praktik Dan Evaluasi; Kumpulan Pemikiran Mengenai Perundang-Undangan Indonesia Dari Murid Dan Kolega Prof. Dr. Bagir Manan, S.H., M.C.L. 33–40. Sumedang: Unpad Press.
Gandhi, L.M. 1995. Harmonisasi Hukum Menuju Hukum Yang Responsif. Pidato Pengukuhan Guru Besar Tetap Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia. Depok: Jawa Barat.
Goesniadhie, S Kusnu. 2006. Harmonisasi Hukum dalam Perspektif PerundangUndangan (Lex Spesialis Suatu Masalah). Surabaya: JP Book.
Hadjon, Phillipus M. 1994. Pengantar Hukum Administrasi Negara di Indonesia. Keduabelas. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.
Hutchinson, Terry. 2002. Researching and Writing in Law. Sydney, Australia: Lawbook Co.
Kant, Immanuel. 2010. Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kemdikbud. 2020. Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Kemendikbud. http://kbbi. kemendikbud.go.id.
Mahkamah Agung. 2016. Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung RI Nomor Nomor 4 Tahun 2016 Tentang Pemberlakuan Rumusan Hasil Rapat Pleno Kamar Mahkamah Agung Tahun 2016 Sebagai Pedoman Pelaksanaan Tugas Bagi Pengadilan. https://jdih.mahkamahagung.go.id/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=46&func=fileinfo&id=386 8.
Manan, Abdul. 2013. Aspek-Aspek Pengubah Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana.
Manan, Bagir. 1995. Peranan Hukum Administrasi Negara Dalam Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan. Ujung Pandang.
Mochtar, Zainal Arifin. 2015. Antinomi Dalam Peraturan Perundang-Undangan di Indonesia. Hasanuddin Law Review. 1(3). 316-336. https://doi.org/10.20956/halrev. v1n3.112.
Muslim, Abu. 2016. Etika Dan Moralitas Ala George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Jurnal Pusaka. 4(3). 239–251.
Permana, Tri Cahaya Indra. 2015. Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara Pasca Undang-Undang Administrasi Pemerintahan Ditinjau Dari Segi Acces to Justice. Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan. 4(3). 419–222. http://weekly.cnbnews.com/news/article.html?no=124000.
Riza, Dola. 2019. Hakikat KTUN Menurut Undang-Undang Peradlan Tata Usaha Negara Vs Undang- Undang Admnistrasi Pemerintahan. Sumatera Law Review. 2(2). 207– 220. https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.22216/soumlaw.v2i2.3566.
Simanjuntak, Enrico. 2018. Hukum Acara Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara (Transformasi & Refleksi). Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
Simanjuntak, Enrico. 2019. Restatement on Judicial Juridiction in Administrative Tort. Hukum Peratun. 2(2). 165–190.
Supriyanto, Eddy. 1989. Konsep Hukum Sebagai Sarana Pembaruan Masyarakat dalam Kehidupan Berencana: Mazhab dan Refleksinya. Bandung: CV Remaja Karya.
Suyahmo. 2017. Filsafat Dialektika Hegel: Relevansinya Dengan Pembukaan UUD 1945. Humaniora. 19(2). 143-150. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.22146/jh.898.
Wijaya, Hana Novia. 2021. Pengadilan Khusus Di Lingkungan Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara ( Studi Komparatif USA Tax Court ). Ilmu Sosial Dan Pendidikan (JISIP). 5(4). 1647–1656. https://doi.org/10.36312/jisip.v5i4.2604.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20884/1.jdh.2022.22.1.3194
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
JURNAL DINAMIKA HUKUM Indexed by :
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
 |  |
 | Jurnal Dinamika Hukum |  |
| Faculty of Law, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman | Copyright of Jurnal Dinamika Hukum | |
| Yustisia IV Building, Law Journal Center | ISSN 2407-6562 (Online) ISSN 1410-0797 (Print) | |
| Purwokerto, Central Java, Indonesia, 53122 | JDH is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License | |