Paper Assignment

Judgement in Administrative Court

Naila Ashyla Azzahra | 1906424311 | Kelas Khusus Internasional

I. Introduction
In a court procedure, Judgment is the end of the whole process of a lawsuit.
That is the general understanding of what is judgment in any kinds of court in
Indonesia law system. In Administrative Court, there are no distinct difference
in the definition, types, and the format of judgment itself with the other types of
court in Indonesia. The only notable difference from the other types of court
judgment are the object of the dispute that rise from administrative decision or
administrative bodies. This paper will explain more about judgment in
Administrative Court with a judgment case example.

II. Definition of Judgment.

Judgement is the result from the long process of a lawsuit in a court. Some
experts has their own definitions on what is a judgmennt in a court. Prof.
Sudikno Mertokusumo defines judgment as a statement by a judge as an official
in court that was given the authority to do so, written, and be spoken on the
court to end the process of a lawsuit. The written judgment don’t have any
power as a judgment before it was spoken on the court itself1.
Despite the fact that the definition above was made as a civil court principle,
there are no significant difference if we’re about to include it in the theory for
administrative court since the main idea is more or less the same.
Generally, there are 4 principle in making the court judgment. These needs
to be implemented in order to reflect the principles of good justice.
- Right to a decision

1
Sudikno Mertokusumo Hukum Acara Perdata Indonesia, 2006
 A principle where the judge must render the judgment and within an
appropriate grace period. This decision also derives from the right of every
person to file a lawsuit and the prohibition against judges from refusing to
judge.
- A Fair Hearing
A principle where every person who file a lawsuit has the right to defend
themselves with proofs.
- No Bias
A principle where the judgment shall be passed objectively and is not under
any influence from any person outside of the case that could have a personal
interests.
- Reasons and argumentations of decision
A principle where the judgment should consists of valid arguments with a
strong legal basis eventhough judge has its own discretion to pass the
judgment2.
In the Administrative Court Proceedings Law (UU No. 5 thn 1986
tentang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara), after both parties submitted their
conclusion for the court, The Panel of Judges discuss the outcome of the
trial in private first before announcing the judgment for a case. It was
describes in the article as follows:
Article 97
(2) Setelah kedua belah pihak mengemukakan kesimpulan sebagaimana
dimaksud dalam ayat (1), maka Hakim Ketua Sidang menyatakan bahwa
sidang ditunda untuk memberikan kesempatan kepada Majelis Hakim
bermusyawarah dalam ruangan tertutup untuk mempertimbangkan segala
sesuatu guna putusan sengketa tersebut.
(3) Putusan dalam musyawarah majelis yang dipimpin oleh Hakim Ketua
Majelis merupakan hasil permufakatan bulat, kecuali jika setelah

2
Riawan Tjandra, Teori dan Praktik Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara, , Cahaya Atma Pustaka,
Yogyakarta, 2011.,
 diusahakan dengan sungguh-sungguh tidak dapat dicapai permufakatan
bulat, putusan diambil dengan suara terbanyak.
(4) Apabila musyawarah majelis sebagaimana dimaksud dalam ayat (3)
tidak dapat menghasilkan putusan, permusyawaratan ditunda sampai
musyawarah majelis berikutnya.
(5) Apabila dalam musyawarah majelis berikutnya tidak dapat diambil
suara terbanyak, maka suara terakhir Hakim Ketua Majelis yang
menentukan.
(6) Putusan Pengadilan dapat dijatuhkan pada hari itu juga dalam sidang
yang terbuka untuk umum, atau ditunda pada hari lain yang harus
diberitahukan kepada kedua belah pihak.

The article also explains that the judgment can be announced on the same
day or postponing the trial to another day.
One of the most important thing when passing the judgment is that the The
Court's decision must be pronounced in a hearing open to the public. If one of
the parties or both parties is not present at the time the Court's decision is
pronounced, at the order of the Chief Judge of the session a copy of the decision
shall be submitted by registered letter to the concerned person3.
With PERMA 1/2019 article 26, judgment is spoken electronically and
legally done by conveying it to the party. The pronounciation of the judgment
Is deemed to have been attended by the parties and conducted in a session open
to the public. It’ll affixed with an electronic signature according to the
regulatory requirements for electronic information and transactions.
The nature Decisions and or the Decision of the State Administrative Court
are erga omnes, namely binding all parties, not only binding to the disputing
parties.

3
Article 108 UU 5/1986
 III. Type of Judgment
In general court proceedings, there are two kinds of decision. The
interlocutory verdict (putusan sela) that will help the examination process and
final decision that ends the series of trial examination4.
Types of final decision in Adminstrative court were regulated in article 97
paragraph 7 on the Administrative Court Proceedings Law.
Court decisions can be in the form of:
a. The lawsuit is rejected;
Rejecting the lawsuit means strengthening the decision of the body
of state administrative officials.
b. The lawsuit was granted;
It means that it does not justify the decision of the body of state
administrative officials either fully or partly. It also means that the
decision should also include the obligations for the body of state
administrative officials to retract the administrative decision, retract and
make a new administrative decision, or creating a new decision in case
there is no administrative decisions before.
The obligation as referred to in paragraph (9) may be accompanied
by the imposition of compensation. In the event that the Court's decision
concerns employment, thenaddition to the obligations as meant in
paragraph (9) and paragraph (10), it can be accompanied by giving
rehabilitation.
c. Lawsuit not accepted;
Not accepting lawsuit means the lawsuit does not follows the
requirements.
d. Lawsuit was invalid;
The lawsuit is invalid if the parties or their attorney did not attend the
scheduled trial despite being properly summoned5.

4
Riawan Tjandra, Teori dan Praktik Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara, , Cahaya Atma Pustaka,
Yogyakarta, 2011
5
ibid
 The types of the final judgment above has different nature which was:

a. Condemnatoir
Is a decision that containing imposition for the losing party.
b. Declaratoir
Is a decision that states a situation as a condition that is legal according
to law. This decision has the character of only explaining, confirming a
legal situation solely.
c. Constitutive
Is a decision that creates a new legal state. This new legal state can be in
the form of negating a legal condition or giving rise to a new legal
condition 6.

IV. Format of Judgment

There are few considerations when judging a state administrative dispute
like the considerations of the case position, the jurisprudence, and the judging
part.
Based on the law No. 48/2009 about judicial powers, the parts of a
judgment contains:
1. Head of Judgment
"For the sake of justice based on the one and only Godhead" title / power
of execution, the court's decision can be implemented.
2. The identity of the litigants
It must be clearly stated, namely the name, address, occupation and so
on, as well as the name of the attorney if that is concerned
3. Considerations (reasons)
This part is the basis of a decision consisting of 2 (two) parts, namely, the
consideration of the sit of the case (Feitelijke gronden) is about what happens in
front of the court, often the lawsuit and answers are quoted in full and legal
considerations (rechts gronden) that determine the value of a verdict.

6
Ibid
 4. Amar (dictum) verdict
The judge is obliged to adjudicate all parts of the charge, both in
competence and in reconnaissance, otherwise the decision must be annulled.
Even so, the judge may not issue a verdict on something that is not required to
empower others.

In Administrative Court decision while judging a state administrative

dispute, judges need to have some consideration while arranging the decision.
The case position considerations should be analyzed in detail and complete
since if there was a proposition that was not considered it could be a reason for
a cassation process. The legal considerations shall include the conclution of
parties opinion with the judicial evaluation of the object of dispute. The
considerations were also made with the principle of ius curia novit where the
judge understands the law related to the case. And the judging part shall be
either declaratoir or condemnatoir to complete the decision.
In making a decision, Judge can come up with an alternative when faced
with a case that needs a special method. Some of the known methods are
disavowal, reinterpretation, remedy, and invalidation. Disavowal use the
specific regulation and not implementing the general principles with lex
specialis principle as main arguments. Reinterpretation is the method where
judge reinterpret an existing law that was related to the object of the dispute to
give new ways in finding the solution for the dispute. Invalidation method is
where the judge invalidate a state administrative decision due to the fact that the
decision contradicts the higher statute regulations. Lastly remedy becomes a
reconsideration between invalidation and reinterpretations that was related to
the conflict. Remedy also considerate the other methods to choose the best
remedy for the solution to a dispute. These methods need to be applied to give
more ways for the judge in considering their judgment to a lawsuit. 7

7
ibid
 Format of judgment in administrative court was stated in article 109 on the
Administrative Court Proceedings Law. Mainly, the judgment needs to meet
these conditions:
a. The head of the verdict which reads: "DEMI KEADILAN
BERDASARKAN KETUHANAN YANG MAHAESA";
b. The names, titles, nationalities, places of residence or domicile of the
parties to the dispute;
c. Clear summary of the lawsuit and the respondent's answer;
d. Consideration and assessment of each evidence submitted and the
matters that occurred in the trial during the investigation of the dispute;
e. Legal reasons which form the basis of the verdict;
f. Rulings on disputes and case fees;
g. Day, date of judgment, name of judge who decides, name of clerk, as
well as information about the presence or absence of the parties.
Failure to fulfill one of the provisions as referred to as above may result
in the cancellation of the Court's decision. At the latest thirty days after the
decision of the Court is pronounced, said judgment must be signed by the
judge who decides and the Registrar who is participating in the session.

V. Case Example
Decision number : 62/G/2015/PTUN-JKT.
Dispute between The Board of Leaders from Golongan Karya Party
(DPP GOLKAR) against Minister of Law and Human Rights of the
Republic of Indonesia and H.R Agung Laksono and Zainudin Amali. The
object of the dispute is the Decree of the Minister of Law and Human
Rights Number M.HH-01.AH.11.01 of 2015 concerning Ratification of
Amendments to the Articles of Association, Bylaws, and Composition and
Personnel of the Golongan Karya Party Central Executive Board issued /
announced by the defendant on 23 MARCH 2015.
Petitum:
MENGADILI
I. DALAM PENUNDAAN:
 - Menyatakan Penetapan Nomor 62/G/2015/PTUN.JKT tanggal 1
April 2015 tetap sah dan berlaku sampai dengan putusan perkara ini
berkekuatan hukum tetap atau sampai ada penetapan lain yang
mencabutnya;
II. DALAM EKSEPSI:
- Menyatakan eksepsi Tergugat dan Tergugat II-Intervensi tidak
diterima untuk seluruhnya;
III. DALAM POKOK SENGKETA:
1. Mengabulkan gugatan Penggugat untuk sebagian;
2. Menyatakan batal Surat Keputusan Menteri Hukum dan
Hak Asasi Manusia Nomor M.HH-01.AH.11.01 Tahun 2015
tertanggal 23 Maret 2015 tentang Pengesahan Perubahan
Anggaran Dasar dan Anggaran Rumah Tangga serta Komposisi
dan Personalia Dewan Pimpinan Pusat Partai Golongan Karya;
3. Mewajibkan kepada Tergugat untuk mencabut Surat
Keputusan Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia Nomor M.HH-
01.AH.11.01 Tahun 2015 tertanggal 23 Maret 2015 tentang
Pengesahan Perubahan Anggaran Dasar dan Anggaran Rumah
Tangga serta Komposisi dan Personalia Dewan Pimpinan Pusat
Partai Golongan Karya; Halaman 172 dari 173 halaman. Putusan
Nomor 62/G/2015/PTUN-JKT.
4. Menolak gugatan Penggugat untuk selebihnya;
5. Menghukum Tergugat dan Tergugat II Intervensi untuk
membayar biaya perkara secara tanggung renteng sebesar Rp.
348.000,- (tiga ratus empat puluh delapan ribu rupiah);

Based on the analysis, the decision type is a granting of the lawsuit

since the judge stated that it accept both the lawsuit and the exception partly,
in addition there’s an obligation that needs to be carried by the parties. The
defendant is also obligated to pay for the court fee. The petitum of the
decision is condemnatoir since it contains imposition for the losing party in
this case the Defendant and Defendant II Intervened, Minister of Law and
Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia and H.R Agung Laksono and
Zainudin Amali.
The format of the decision also fulfilled the requirements needed by
law that consists of:
a. The head of the verdict which reads: "DEMI KEADILAN
BERDASARKAN KETUHANAN YANG MAHAESA";
b. The names, titles, nationalities, places of residence or domicile of
the parties to the dispute;
Plaintiff
1. Ir. ABURIZAL BAKRIE, Kewarganegaraan Indonesia,
Pekerjaan Ketua Umum DPP Partai GOLKAR Periode
2009-2014 maupun Ketua Umum DPP Partai GOLKAR
Periode 2014-2019, bertempat tinggal di Jalan
Magunsarkoro Nomor 42, Menteng, Jakarta Pusat
2. IDRUS MARHAM, Kewarganegaraan Indonesia,
Pekerjaan Sekretaris Jenderal DPP Partai GOLKAR
Periode 2009-2014 maupun Sekretaris Jenderal DPP
Partai GOLKAR Periode 2014-2019, bertempat tinggal di
Komplek DPRD DKI Jakarta Blok F Nomor 3 Cibubur,
Jakarta Timur;
Dalam hal ini memberikan Kuasa Khusus
Defendant (state institution)
1. MENTERI HUKUM DAN HAK ASASI MANUSIA
REPUBLIK INDONESIA, Berkedudukan di Jalan H.R.
Rasuna Said Kavling 6-7, Kuningan, Jakarta Selatan, DKI
Jakarta 12940, dalamhal ini memberikan Kuasa Khusus
kepada: Dr. Aidir Amin Daud, S.H.,M.H., jabatan Plt.
Direktur Jenderal Administrasi Hukum Umum Kementerian
Hukum dan HAM R.I. berdasarkan surat Kuasa Khusus
tanggal 10 April 2015
2. MENTERI HUKUM DAN HAK ASASI MANUSIA
REPUBLIK INDONESIA, Berkedudukan di Jalan H.R.
 Rasuna Said Kavling 6-7, Kuningan, Jakarta Selatan, DKI
Jakarta 12940, dalamhal ini memberikan Kuasa Khusus
kepada: Dr. Aidir Amin Daud, S.H.,M.H., jabatan Plt.
Direktur Jenderal Administrasi Hukum Umum Kementerian
Hukum dan HAM R.I. berdasarkan surat Kuasa Khusus
tanggal 10 April 2015
c. Clear summary of the lawsuit and the respondent's answer;
There are clear summary that was divided into point by reiterating
the content of the lawsuit and the answers. The summary is

Whereas the Object of the Dispute which ratified the GOLKAR

Party DPP Management based on the National Conference of the
GOLKAR Party ("TANDINGAN") which was held at the Mercure
Hotel, Ancol, Jakarta, on 6-8 December 2014 which was held
against the law and without constitutional basis by those claiming to
be the Rescue Team (tim penyelamat) GOLKAR Party with the
structure of the Presidium, which consists of HR Agung Laksono,
Priyo Budi Santoso, Agus Gumiwang Kartasasmita, Lawrence
Tp.Siburian, Zainuddin Amali, Yorrys Raweyai, Agun Gunanjar
Sudarisa, Ibnu Munzir (hereinafter referred to as “TPPG”) have
harmed Page 10 of 173 pages. Decision Number 62 / G / 2015 /
PTUN-JKT. PLAINTIFF. PLAINTIFF, as the official GOLKAR
Party DPP Executive based on the decision of the VIII MUNAS
GOLKAR Party in Pekanbaru, from 5 to 8 October 2009, for the
2009-2014 stewardship period which is also a legitimate GOLKAR
Party DPP administrator based on the results of the GOLKAR
Party's National Conference IX in Bali on 30 November to 4
December 2014 for the 2014-2019 management period was greatly
harmed by the issuance of the Defendant's Decree, because the
Defendant's Decree caused chaos in the management of the
GOLKAR Party;
d. Consideration and assessment of each evidence submitted and the
matters that occurred in the trial during the investigation of the
dispute;

The decision considerations for all the evidence are included in the
decision. The paragraph is as follows:

…Menimbang, bahwa setelah mendengarkan keterangan dan

kesimpulan para Pihak, memeriksa alat bukti tertulis yang diajukan
para pihak dan mendengarkan keterangan para ahli, baik yang
diajukan Penggugat maupun Tergugat dan Tergugat II Intervensi,
serta Surat Keterangan Ketua Mahkamah Partai Golkar,
Pengadilan berpendapat bahwa dalam mempertimbangkan gugatan
Penggugat a quo, terdapat beberapa hal substansial yang harus
dipertimbangkan menyangkut pengertian-pengertian sebagai
berikut:
1. Perselisihan Partai Politik dan upaya hukum terhadap Putusan
Mahkamah Partai Politik atau sebutan lain yang dibentuk oleh
Partai Politik Yang bersifat Final dan Mengikat;
2. Daya laku Putusan Mahkamah Partai Politik atau sebutan lain
yang dibentuk oleh Partai Politik Yang Berkenaan Dengan
Kepengurusan dan Keputusan Menteri Hukum dan HAM dalam
menetapkan Perubahan Anggaran Dasar, Anggaran Rumah Tangga
dan perubahan susunan kepengurusan baru Partai Politik;…

e. Legal reasons which form the basis of the verdict;

There are legal considerations in the judging of the case
(pertimbangan hukum) in this case example, the legal reasons are to
explain the capability of the plaintiff to file a lawsuit against the
defendant.
 Menimbang, bahwa berdasarkan Pasal 53 ayat (1) Undang-Undang
Nomor 9 Tahun 2004 yang berbunyi: “Orang atau badan hukum
perdata yang merasa kepentingannya dirugikan oleh suatu
Keputusan Tata Usaha Negara dapat mengajukan gugatan tertulis
kepada pengadilan yang berwenang yang berisi tuntutan agar
Keputusan Tata Usaha Negara yang disengketakan itu dinyatakan
batal atau tidak sah, dengan atau tanpa disertai tuntutan ganti rugi
dan/atau direhabilitasi “; Berdasarkan rumusan di atas maka yang
berkualitas menjadi Penggugat adalah Seseorang atau Badan Hukum
Perdata yang merasa kepentingannya dirugikan oleh suatu
Keputusan Tata Usaha Negara yang dikeluarkan oleh Badan atau
Pejabat Tata Usaha Negara baik di pusat maupun di daerah ;
Menimbang, bahwa Penggugat adalah pihak yang dinyatakan
susunan kepengurusannya tidak berlaku lagi oleh Surat Keputusan
Menteri Hukum Dan Hak Asasi Manusia RI Nomor M.HH-
01.AH.11.01 tanggal 23 Maret 2015 Tentang Pengesahan Perubahan
Anggaran Dasar, Anggaran Rumah Tangga, Serta Komposisi dan
Personalia Dewan Pimpinan Pusat Partai Golongan Karya (Objek
Sengketa). Maka dengan demikian, menurut Pengadilan Penggugat
memiliki kedudukan hukum (legal standing) untuk mengajukan
gugatan a quo

f. Rulings on disputes and case fees;

The rulings on the disputes is to cancel the Decree of the Minister of
Law and Human Rights Number M.HH-01.AH.11.01 of 2015 dated
23 March 2015 concerning Ratification of Amendments to Articles
of Association and Bylaws as well as Composition and Personnel of
the Golongan Karya Central Leadership Council and obliging the
Defendant to revoke Decree of the Minister of Law and Human
Rights Number M.HH-01.AH.11.01 Year 2015 dated March 23,
2015 concerning Ratification of Amendments to Articles of
Association and Bylaws and Composition and Personnel of the
 Golongan Karya Party Central Leadership Council. And then the
court order the Defendant and Defendant II intervene to pay joint
fees of Rp. 348,000, - (three hundred and forty-eight thousand
rupiah);

From the judgment we can conclude that this judgement type

is that the lawsuit was granted with condemnatoir nature. It partly
granted the plaintiff’s request, cancelling the Decree of the Minister
of Law and Human Rights Number M.HH-01.AH.11.01 of 2015
dated 23 March 2015 concerning Ratification of Amendments to
Articles of Association and Bylaws, and oblige the defendant
(Ministry of Law and Human Rights) to retract the Ministrial Decree
aforementioned.

g. Day, date of judgment, name of judge who decides, name of clerk,

as well as information about the presence or absence of the parties.

This was decided in a deliberation meeting of the Panel of Judges at

the Jakarta State Administrative Court on Tuesday, 12 May 2015 by
us, TEGUH SATYA BHAKTI, S.H., M.H., as the Chief Judge of
the Assembly, SUBUR M.S. S.H, M.H, and TRI CAHYA INDRA
PERMANA, S.H., M.H. each as Member Judge. The verdict was
pronounced in a trial open to the public on Monday, 18 May 2015
by the Panel of Judges assisted by SRI SUHARTININGSIH, S.H.
M.H. as Substitute Registrar of the Jakarta State Administrative
Court, attended by the Plaintiff's attorney, the Defendant's attorney
and the Intervention Defendant II's attorney;

VI. Conclusion
From the paper, we can see that there are similarities between the
definitions of judgement in various laws and regulations amongst the court in
Indonesia. The definitions for what is Judgment in the Administrative Court
 does not differ much with the other court types. The types of judgment also has
the same types with civil court judgment as mentioned in the paper. The general
format is also the same, but the difference are in the object and the subject of
the dispute.

Bibliography

Riawan Tjandra, Teori dan Praktik Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara, , Cahaya Atma Pustaka,
Yogyakarta, 2011.,

Sudikno Mertokusumo Hukum Acara Perdata Indonesia, 2006

PUTUSAN PENGADILAN TATA USAHA NEGARA NO. 62/G/2015/PTUN.JKT

UU No. 5 thn 1986 tentang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara

UU No. 48 thn 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman

PERMA (Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia) No.1 Tahun 2019 mengenai
ADMINISTRASI PERKARA DAN PERSIDANGAN DI PENGADILAN SECARA
ELEKTRONIK