Legal Administrative Review of Deviations in the Execution of State Administrative Court Decisions in Indonesia

Abstract

The role of the Administrative Court in resolving disputes within the "Government Administration" in Indonesia caused by the absence of executive power has a significant impact. The State Administrative Court, Legal Proceedings Law, regulates the integration and clarification of the enforcement of State Administrative Court decisions, so the execution of the decision is genuinely dependent on the good faith of the government body or its officials in complying with the law. The problem of executing the decisions of the State Administrative Court is a common legal phenomenon. As mentioned by Paulus Effendi Lotulung, the issue of execution is present in various countries; even though multiple regulations and mechanisms regulate it, but there is still no sufficiently effective coercive legal means to force the relevant agencies or officials to comply with the decision. Several factors that cause the weakness of the execution of State Administrative Court (PTUN) decisions that have obtained legal force are as follows: First, the absence of legal regulations that require State Administrative Court officials to implement legally binding court decisions. Second, the factor of judges' reluctance to include forced monetary payments in case the relevant State Administrative Court officials do not execute the court decision. Third, the compliance factor of State Administrative Court officials in carrying out legally binding court decisions. The issue of executing State Administrative Court decisions is also related to the implementation of regional autonomy, as with regional autonomy, all regional government officials in districts/cities have extensive authority in managing their regions and inevitably use administrative decision-making methods.