ANALISIS YURIDIS SOSIOLOGIS TERHADAP PELAKSANAAN PUTUSAN HAKIM PERADILAN TATA USAHA NEGARA (Studi di Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Surabaya)
| Main Author: | TANZIL MULTAZAM , MUHAMMAD |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis NonPeerReviewed Book |
| Bahasa: | eng |
| Terbitan: |
, 2008
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: |
http://eprints.umm.ac.id/7364/1/Analisis_Yuridis_Sosiologis_Terhadap_Pelaksanaan_Putusan.pdf http://eprints.umm.ac.id/7364/ |
Daftar Isi:
- State Administration Judicature (PERATUN) conceptually can be defined as judicature institution that hearing state administration lawsuit, include official lawsuit between departments or officials of state administration with an individual or civil corporation caused by the produced State Administration Decision based on the in-effect law regulations. The formulated problems are about how the implementation of PERATUN judge decision is and what factors hindering the implementation of PERATUN judge decision are. Those are to know the implementation of PERATUN judge decision and the hindering factors in implementing PERATUN judge decision. This research uses sociological juridical method, based on the primary and secondary data sources with literature study and field study, That is interview and documentation of files related to the implementation of PERATUN judge decision and its hindering factors, as data collecting technique, to analyzed qualitative descriptively later. The research results find that the implementation procedure of PERATUN judge decision in State Administration Court (PTUN) of Surabaya is still refers to Law number 5 year 1986. While, in its implementation during 2007 is found that there are 65 decisions, which have had law power, with 55 decisions has been implemented and 10 decisions has not been implemented yet by the accused. The conclusion is that part of the implementation procedures of PERATUN judge decision of PTUN Surabaya is still referring to section 116 Law No. 5 year 1986. It is caused by there is no further regulation yet from Law No. 9 year 2004. That PTUN have no autonomous authority to control the implementation of decisions. The hindrance of its implementation is the less of understanding factor of litigant on the execution system on State Administration Court and the existence of authority conflict in accomplishing omission lawsuit of rights over land between PERATUN and BPN.