The Implementation of the Principles of State Administrative Court (PTUN) in the Provisions of the PTUN Law

Dini Wininta Sari, S.H.

Contributor

16 Mar 2023 · 04:00 16 March 2023 04:00 WIB 5 minutes reading time: 5 minutes 18 read

Legal Literacy - This article discusses three principles in the procedural law of the state administrative court (PTUN), namely the presumption of legality (vermoeden van rechtmatigheid), the principle of active judge (free proof),...

The Implementation of the Principles of State Administrative Court (PTUN) in the Provisions of the PTUN Law

Opinion Note

This opinion article was written by a contributor/columnist. The views expressed are entirely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors.

CONTRIBUTOR PROGRAM

You can become a columnist at Legal Literacy.

Submit your legal opinion/analysis writing. If it is published, you have the opportunity to obtain a payout/honorarium in accordance with the provisions.

Submit Article Read Guidelines

Table of Contents

1. Principle of Presumption of Rechtmatig (Vermoeden van Rechtmatigheid, Praesumptio Iustae Causa)
2. Principle of Active Judge (Free Proof)
3. Principle of Decision is Erga Omnes
4. Principle of Unrecognized Counterclaim
References

Legal Literacy- This article discusses three principles in the procedural law of state administrative courts (PTUN), namely the principle of presumption of rechtmatig (vermoeden van rechtmatigheid), the principle of active judge (free proof), and the principle that decisions are erga omnes. This article explains the provisions in Law Number 5 of 1986 concerning State Administrative Courts (UU PTUN) and Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration related to these three principles. This article also discusses the implications of these three principles in the practice of PTUN procedural law.

1. Principle of Presumption of Rechtmatig (Vermoeden van Rechtmatigheid, Praesumptio Iustae Causa)

The principle of presumption of rechtmatig means that every action of the authority or government must always be considered correct until it is canceled, this is stated in the provisions of Article 67 paragraph (1) of Law Number 5 of 1986 concerning State Administrative Courts (UU PTUN). This principle is also closely related to the fact that a lawsuit basically cannot postpone the implementation of the Disputed State Administrative Decision (KTUN), unless there is an urgent interest from the plaintiff (Article 67 paragraph (1) and paragraph (4) letter a of the UU PTUN).

Resistance to a determination that is equipped with considerations that the lawsuit filed is declared unacceptable or unfounded can be submitted to the Court within a period of 14 (fourteen) days after it is pronounced, examined and decided by the Court in a summary proceeding (Article 62 paragraph (4) of the UU PTUN).

Meanwhile, the provisions regarding the cancellation of KTUN can be found in Article 66 and Article 67 of Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Administration Governance. Basically, the cancellation of KTUN can be done if there is a defect in authority, a defect in procedure, and/or a defect in substance. In the event that the KTUN is canceled, a new KTUN must be established by the TUN body or official by including the legal basis cancellation and paying attention to the General Principles of Good Governance (AUPB). This confirms that the KTUN can only be canceled/not null and void by law.