Main Article Content

Abstract

Nowadays, Indonesia as a developing country has been developed in various sectors. Globalization is a process of organizational change from the function of capitalism which is marked by the emergence of the integration of markets and transnational companies and the lagging of supranational institutions. With this, it is possible for it to affect the work patterns of Indonesian society. For this reason, a further legal remedy will be needed if the party that feels disadvantage is not satisfied with the outcome of the dispute resolution that arises due to the development of globalization. The intended legal remedies are administrative efforts as referred to in Article 48 of Law Number 51 of 2009 concerning Amendments to Law Number 9 of 2004 concerning Amendments to Law Number 5 of 1986 concerning State Administrative Court (PTUN). The aim of this article is to find out the authority for dispute resolution of State Administrative Court (PTUN) toward dismissal with no reverence verdict and dispute resolution efforts for State Administrative Court (PTUN) toward dismissal with no reverence verdict. Juridical normative is applied as research method. This research concludes that dispute resolution on personnel is done through the State Administrative Court except it is caused by violations of the disciplinary rules of the State Civil Apparatus which will be resolved through administrative appeals to the Court of Civil Service.

Article Details

How to Cite
Nuna, M., Moonti, R. M., Tumuhulawa, A., & Kodai, D. A. (2020). KEWENANGAN PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA TATA USAHA NEGARA TERHADAP PUTUSAN PEMBERHENTIAN TIDAK DENGAN HORMAT. University Of Bengkulu Law Journal, 5(2), 106–118. https://doi.org/10.33369/ubelaj.5.2.106-118

References

  1. Ahmad Dahlan Hasibuan, dkk, “Faktor Penyebab Tidak Dilaksanakannya Putusan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Dan Upaya Penanggulangannya (Analisis Kasus Putusan PTUN Medan No: 17/G/2000/PTUN-MDN)”, Jurnal Mercatoria, Vol. 6 Nomor 2 Desember 2013. Hlm. 134.
  2. Azzahrawi, dkk, “Wewenang Dan Kendala Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Dalam Menyelesaikan Sengketa Kepegawaian Setelah Upaya Administratif”, Syiah Kuala Law Journal : Vol. 3, No.2 Agustus 2019. hlm. 206.
  3. Bambang Arwanto, “Kewenangan PTUN Dalam Menyelesaikan Sengketa Perbuatan Melanggar Hukum Oleh Pemerintah (Onrechmatige Overheidsdaad)”, Jurnal Hukum Jatiswara, Universitas Mataram, hlm. 2-3.
  4. Fahrudin Rasyid, “Pengabaian Penerapan Sanksi oleh Pejabat Berwenang terhadap Pelanggaran Disiplin Berat Pegawai Negeri Sipil”, Legal Research, Faculty of Law Halu Oleo University, Volume 1 Issue 1 April 2019. hlm. 53.
  5. H. Abdul Khair dkk, “Penyelesaian Sengketa Keputusan Tata Usaha Negara Melalui Upaya Banding Administratif”, Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Jatiswara Vol. 31 Nomor 3 November 2016. Hlm. 416.
  6. Jupri & Roy Marthen Moonti, Diskriminasi Hukum Dalam Pemberantasan Korupsi Politik Di Daerah, Dialogia Iuridica, Volume 11 Nomor 1, November 2019.
  7. Muten Nuna & Roy Marthen Moonti, “Kebebasan Hak Sosial-Politik Dan Partisipasi Warga Negara Dalam Sistem Demokrasi Di Indonesia”, Jurnal Ius Constituendum | Volume 4 Nomor 2 Oktober 2019. Hlm. 112.
  8. Robinsar Marbun, “Transformasi Upaya Administratif Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Kepegawaian”, Jurnal Yuridis Vol. 4 No. 2, Desember 2017. hlm. 209.
  9. Rusnin, “Pemberhentian Dengan Tidak Hormat Pegawai Aparatur Sipil Negara (Tinjauan Undang-Undang No. 5 Tahun 2014)”, Jurnal Transformasi Administrasi Volume 09 Nomor 02 Tahun 2019. hlm. 187.
  10. Tri Cahya Indra Permana, “Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara Pasca Undang-Undang Administrasi Pemerintahan Ditinjau Dari Segi Access To Justice”, Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan, Vol. 4 Nomor 3 Nobemver 2015. Hlm. 430.
  11. Yodi Martono Wahyunadi, “Kompetensi Absolut Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Dalam Konteks Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 Tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan”, Jurnal Hukum Vol. 5 Nomor 1 Maret 2016. Hal 136.