Reconstruction of the Authority of the Administrative Court (Ptun) To Ad-judicate Positive Fictitious Decisions
Keywords:
Judicial Interpretation, Positive Fictitious Decision, Procedural Law, State Administrative Tribunal, Substantive JusticeAbstract
This research discusses the lack of effectiveness in the authority of the State Administrative Tribunal (PTUN) in handling disputes arising from positive fictitious decisions, as regulated in Law Number 30 of 2014 on Government Administration. This law emphasizes PTUN's role in providing legal certainty for decisions that are deemed legally granted despite the absence of a response from the relevant authorities. Although PTUN has jurisdiction over such disputes, the overly formalistic procedural approach often leads to lawsuits being dismissed or deemed inadmissible, contradicting the principles of modern administrative justice.This study aims to reconstruct PTUN's authority to enhance its effectiveness in adjudicating cases involving positive fictitious decisions. A normative juridical approach is applied by examining applicable legal provisions, analyzing court rulings, and referring to relevant legal literature. The findings indicate that procedural rigidity and normative ambiguity remain significant obstacles, particularly in determining the object of the dispute and proving the silence of government officials or agencies. This research offers a conceptual reconstruction of PTUN's authority, advocating for a more progressive judicial interpretation and the enforcement of the due process of law principle. Strengthening PTUN’s role is expected to improve administrative accountability, expand public access to justice, and provide better legal certainty in addressing uncertainties arising from government inaction
References
Al’anam, M., Ramli, L., & Hemsanit, N. (2024). The Expansion of the Absolute Competence of Administrative Courts: A Comparative Legal Study with the French Conseil d’État. Nagara Law Journal, 1(02).
Androniceanu, A. (2021). Transparency in public administration as a challenge for a good democratic governance. Revista» Administratie Si Management Public «(RAMP), 36, 149–164.
Arifin, F. (2024a). An Assessment of the Productivity and Effectiveness of Law Making from the Legal Perspective of the Indonesian State. International Journal of Law and Public Policy (IJLAPP), 6(1), 29–37.
Arifin, F. (2024b). THE DYNAMICS OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW IN INDONESIA: A CRITICAL STUDY AS A RESULT OF ANWAR USMAN’S LAWSUIT IN THE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT. HERMENEUTIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 8(2), 184–193.
Cafaggi, F., & Iamiceli, P. (2021). Uncertainty, administrative decision-making and judicial review: The courts’ perspectives. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 12(4), 792–824.
Chen, H., Wu, L., Chen, J., Lu, W., & Ding, J. (2022). A comparative study of automated legal text classification using random forests and deep learning. Information Processing & Management, 59(2), 102798.
Eliantonio, M., & Vogiatzis, N. (2021). Judicial and extra-judicial challenges in the EU multi-and cross-level administrative framework. German Law Journal, 22(3), 315–324.
Fajri, M. N. (2023). Legitimacy of Public Participation in the Establishment of Law in Indonesia: Legitimasi Partisipasi Masyarakat Dalam Pembentukan Undang-Undang Di Indonesia. Jurnal Konstitusi, 20(1), 123–143.
Firman, F., Sumatono, S., Muluk, M. R. K., Setyowati, E., & Rahmawati, R. (2024). Enhancing Citizen Participation: The Key To Public Service Transparency. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 12(1), e2937–e2937.
Gusthomi, M. I., Rinaldi, F. A., & Setiani, M. D. (2024). The Role of PTUN Procedural Law in Protecting Citizens’ Rights Against Decisions of State Administrative Officials. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan, 41(2), 89–93.
Hamzani, A. I., Widyastuti, T. V., Khasanah, N., & Rusli, M. H. M. (2023). Legal Research Method: Theoretical and Implementative Review. International Journal of Membrane Science and Technology, 10(2), 3610–3619.
Heusala, A.-L., & Koroteev, K. (2023). Administrative Law and Procedure. In Foundations of Russian Law (pp. 377–406). Bloomsbury Academic.
Kupita, W. (2021). Ordinary State Administrative Dispute and Positive-Fictitious decisions Dispute in Administrative Court (PTUN), In Relation to Administrative Appeal. Jurnal Dinamika Hukum, 21(1), 92–104.
Kusdarini, E., Priyanto, A., Hartini, S., & Suripno, S. (2022). Roles of justice courts: settlement of general election administrative disputes in Indonesia. Heliyon, 8(12).
Kyriakides, N., Shrikhande, A., & Stefanatos, L. (2021). The Rocket Docket System: A Model for Active Case Management in Countries Facing Judicial Delays. NY Int’l L. Rev., 34, 79.
Lestary, D., & Suryani, L. (2024). Management of Village Fund Allocation in Realizing Good Governance in Pematang Tujuh Village, Pontianak. Basic and Applied Accounting Research Journal, 4(1), 31–40.
Muhammad, S., & Long, X. (2021). Rule of law and CO2 emissions: a comparative analysis across 65 belt and road initiative (BRI) countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 279, 123539.
Negara, T. A. S. (2023). Normative legal research in Indonesia: Its originis and approaches. Audito Comparative Law Journal (ACLJ), 4(1), 1–9.
Patyi, A. (2022). Issues of fundamental procedural rights and procedural constitutionality in the Fundamental Law. Institutiones Administrationis–Journal of Administrative Sciences, 2(1), 6–23.
Putri, A. K., & Taun, T. (2023). Peranan Hukum Pajak Dalam Pembangunan Ekonomi Nasional Guna Mencapai Tujuan Negara. Jurnal Ilmiah Wahana Pendidikan, 9(1), 198–209.
Risadde, F. R., Widiarto, A. E., & Qurbani, I. D. (2024). Connectivity of Discretionary Status in State Administrative Court Lawsuit: Implications After Law Number 6 of 2023 on Amendments to the Job Creation PERPPU. Journal of Social and Policy Issues, 148–153.
Rozsnyai, K. F. (2024). Regulating the Competence of Administrative Justice and the Public-Private Law Divide. Cent. Eur. Pub. Admin. Rev., 22, 185.
Rusakova, E. P., Frolova, E. E., & Gorbacheva, A. I. (2020). Digital rights as a new object of civil rights: issues of substantive and procedural law. Artificial Intelligence: Anthropogenic Nature vs. Social Origin, 665–673.
Safnul, D., Kamello, T., Pubra, H., & Ikhsan, E. (2024). Settlement of Contract Business Activities Disputes through Arbitration: Evidence From Construction Service Company. Calitatea, 25(201), 286–291.
Suksi, M. (2021). Administrative due process when using automated decision-making in public administration: some notes from a Finnish perspective. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 29(1), 87–110.
Sunstein, C. R., & Vermeule, A. (2020). Law and leviathan: redeeming the administrative state. Harvard University Press.
Sutrisno, A. (2024). Analysis of state administrative court procedural law: A recent review and its practical implications. Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Science, 3(8).
Tschopp, D., Tian, Z., Berberich, M., Fan, J., Perers, B., & Furbo, S. (2020). Large-scale solar thermal systems in leading countries: A review and comparative study of Denmark, China, Germany and Austria. Applied Energy, 270, 114997.
Varuhas, J. N. E. (2023). Mapping doctrinal methods. In Researching Public Law in Common Law Systems (pp. 70–103). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Wardana, D. J., Sukardi, S., & Salman, R. (2023). Public participation in the law-making process in indonesia. Jurnal Media Hukum, 30(1), 66–77.
ZULKARNAIN, N. J. R. (2020). REKONSTRUKSI KEPEMILIKAN TEMPAT BERJUALAN DI PASAR-PASAR RAKYAT YANG DIKELOLA OLEH PERUSAHAAN DAERAH PASAR KOTA MEDAN YANG BERBASIS NILAI KEADILAN. Universitas Islam Sultan Agung Semarang.
Еlena, B., & Viktor, К. (2024). Technologies versus justice: Challenges of AI regulation in the judicial system. Legal Issues in the Digital Age, 2, 113–126
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Nowo Laksono, Krisnadi Nasution, Budiarsih
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
