Abstract
Legal protection of civil servants (PNS) in a dispute over staffing has undergone a paradigm shift with the enactment of Law No. 30 of 2014 on Government Administration (UUAP). The paradigm change then has implications for the authority of the Civil Service Advisory Board (BAPEK). This study aims to analyze how UUAP provide legal protection to the Civil Servant who was dismissed not because of disciplinary punishment of civil servants and what are the implications of the legal protection against BAPEK authority. This research is normative legal research with qualitative analysis through conceptual approach and legal approach to legal issue which become subject matter in research. Conclusions are drawn deductively through a coherent and systematic description. To support this research, the authors conducted interviews with some of the top officials at BAPEK in Jakarta as complementary data supporting the research analysis. Based on the results of the study, the enactment of the UUAP which has established the regulation of administrative efforts in Articles 75 to 78, carries the legal consequence that the dismissed civil servant which not due to disciplinary punishment may undertake dispute resolution through administrative measures even though the relevant rules governing it, do not provide a dispute resolution through Administrative effort. This then implies the widespread authority of BAPEK, which before the enactment of UUAP is only authorized to handle administrative appeals of personnel disputes caused by the dismissal of civil servants due to disciplinary punishment.
Highlights
This research is normative legal research with qualitative analysis through conceptual approach and legal approach to legal issue which become subject matter in research
Based on the results of the study, the enactment of the UUAP which has established the regulation of administrative efforts in Articles 75 to 78, carries the legal consequence that the dismissed civil servant which not due to disciplinary punishment may undertake dispute resolution through administrative measures even though the relevant rules governing it, do not provide a dispute resolution through Administrative effort
This implies the widespread authority of Badan Pertimbangan Kepegawaian (BAPEK), which before the enactment of UUAP is only authorized to handle administrative appeals of personnel disputes caused by the dismissal of civil servants due to disciplinary punishment
Summary
Merasa dirugikan kepentingannya oleh suatu keputusan dan/atau tindakan badan dan/atau pejabat pemerintahan, dapat menempuh penyelesaian sengketa administrasi pemerintahan melalui sarana upaya administratif sebelum mengajukan gugatan melalui lembaga peradilan. “Hakikinya, setiap keputusan TUN dapat diajukan keberatan atau banding administrasi tanpa harus dinyatakan secara eksplisit dalam peraturan perundang-undangan karena kewenangan ini melekat pada pejabat yang menerbitkan keputusan. Saat peraturan perundang-undangan tidak menyediakan prosedur upaya administratif dan penerima keputusan memanfaatkan upaya administratif. Negara (UU ASN) yang membuka peluang terhadap penyelesaian sengketa kepegawaian melalui sarana upaya administratif dengan batasan sebagaimana ditetapkan dalam Pasal. (2) Upaya administratif sebagaimana dimaksud pada ayat (1) terdiri dari keberatan dan banding administratif;. (4) Banding administratif sebagaimana dimaksud pada ayat (2) diajukan kepada badan pertimbangan ASN;.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
