EKSISTENSI ULTRA PETITA DALAM PELAKSANAAN FUNGSI PERADILAN TATA USAHA NEGARA DI PENGADILAN TATA USAHA NEGARA YOGYAKARTA

,, Pratiwi (2014) EKSISTENSI ULTRA PETITA DALAM PELAKSANAAN FUNGSI PERADILAN TATA USAHA NEGARA DI PENGADILAN TATA USAHA NEGARA YOGYAKARTA. S1 thesis, UAJY.

	Text (Halaman Judul) HK010304.pdf Download (694kB)
	Text (Bab I) HK110304.pdf Download (421kB)
	Text (Bab II) HK210304.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (457kB)
	Text (Bab III) HK310304.pdf Download (256kB)

Abstract

Administrative Court as one of the judiciary under the Supreme Court, was created to resolve disputes between government and the citizen of the country as a result of government actions are considered to violate the rights of citizens. Beside that, Administrative Court has a function to monitor the actions of the administrative that detrimental to the people, who at the same time it contains the function of legal protection for the people in the state of law. Administrative Court has a characteristic that are typical when compared with the judiciary in general. One of them is the principle of liveliness judge, where judges burdened with the task of finding material truth, as well as to balance the position of the plaintiff and defendant, because of the defendant’s position is stronger than the plaintiff’s position. Application of the principle of liveliness consequence judges the authority of the Administrative to conduct Ultra Petita,which is decide on matters directly relating to the principal problems that sued, although it’s not requested to be cut off by Plaintiff. Until now there is no provision which expressly allowed or not regulating the permissibility about Ultra Petita. There is no legal reasons, the rules of law, as well as a source of constitutional law governing the Ultra Petita. Thus, legal practitioners (particularly Judge at the Administrative Court) often finding the uncertainty and dissent (differences of opinion) regarding the permissibility allowed or not to use Ultra Petita to decide. This resulted in the application of Ultra Petita be ineffective. Opinions about not allowed to cut off the Ultra Petita also still adopted by most legal practitioners, including legal practitioners (especially judge) at the Administrative Court in Yogyakarta. Almost all of judge at the Administrative Court in Yogyakarta never decide disputes the Administrative that submitted by using Ultra Petita. So this makes the existence of the function Ultra Petita of Administrative at the Administrative Court in Yogyakartais not optimal. Judges decision to decide Ultra Petita when linked with the function of the Justice Admnistrative which aims to examine, decide and resolve disputes Administrative, should be based on a sense of Justice, according to expediency, predictability, and fairness. The most important is the existence of legal grounds and meet the elements of justice, then Ultra Petita can be used (it can be used Ultra Petita).

Actions (login required)

View Item