Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"This wide-ranging comparative account of the legal regimes for controlling administrative power in England, the USA and Australia argues that differences and similarities between control regimes may be partly explained by the constitutional structures of the systems of government in which they are embedded. It applies social-scientific and historical methods to the comparative study of law and legal systems in a novel and innovative way, and combines accounts of long-term and large-scale patterns of power distribution with detailed analysis of features of administrative law and the administrative justice systems of three jurisdictions. It also proposes a new method of analysing systems of government based on two different models of the distribution of public power (diffusion and concentration), a model which proves more illuminating than traditional separation-of-powers analysis."

"The Japanese performance appraisal system, which plays an important part in employment practices here, was initially introduced in the 1920s and 1930s, modeled after a system that was gaining wider use in the USA. But after undergoing different histories of development, the two systems in their present form cut a stark contrast. The system now in use in Japan is characterized above all else by the fact that is has kept intact, as its cornerstone, what used to be the defining features of the American system until the early 1930s (e.g. its application to production workers and non-disclosure of rating results to employees), and has incorporated minor additions of Japanese origin (e.g. an emphasis on ability-based factors), while it has refused to emulate most of the significant changes in the American system since the 1930s. One telling difference between the two systems today can be found in the fact that the Japanese system is frequently (and even intentionally and openly) used as a means of discriminating against 'undesirable' employees. Yet legal, remedial measures for victimized employees remain far from appropriate, whereas in the USA use of the performance appraisal system as a tool of employment discrimination is strictly prohibited by the Civil Rights Act."

"ABSTRAKDalam dimensi sejarah, perluasan kewenangan Peradilan Administrasi dilakukanoleh para hakim peradilan administrasi, sebagai bagian dari proses penemuanhukum (judicial activism) untuk mengisi keterbatasan-keterbatasan UU. No.5/1986 Tentang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara (atau UU. No. 51/2009 dalamperubahan terakhirnya). Namun, perluasan kewenangan absolut peradilanadministrasi melalui praktek peradilan berjalan diametral dengan politik hukumkebijakan legislasi. Dalam penelitian ditemukan disharmoni kebijakan politikhukum di bidang pengaturan eksistensi dan fungsi kompetensi absolut PeradilanAdministrasi, hal ini disebabkan karena tidak adanya grand design dari parapembuat kebijakan, khususnya di bidang legislasi, untuk membangun suatu sistemperadilan administrasi yang efektif, berwibawa dan kuat sesuai dengan cita negarahukum Indonesia. Kelemahan aturan hukum seringkali disikapi bukan denganmemperhatikan keselarasan sistem, namun menggunakan pendekatan-pendekatanreaktif, yakni berorientasi membuat aturan dan lembaga baru, untuk menatasistem hukum yang terganggu atau bermasalah. Dalam penelitian ini dibahas pulabeberapa rancangan undang-undang (RUU) yang secara langsung akanmempengaruhi fungsi peradilan administrasi ke depan, disamping menganalisissinkronisasi kebijakan legislasi dan regulasi dari lima undang-undang mutakhiryang memperluas/menegaskan kewenangan Peradilan Administrasi dalam sistemhukum nasional yaitu : 1) UU. Keterbukaan Informasi Publik; 2) UU. PelayananPublik; 3) UU. Pemilu Anggota DPR/D dan DPD; 4) UU. PengelolaanLingkungan Hidup; 5) UU. Pengadaan Tanah Untuk Kepentingan Umum. Padaakhirnya, Peneliti berkesimpulan bahwa politik hukum yang mengatur danmengelola sistem penyelesaian sengketa antara warga masyarakat atau badanhukum dengan pemerintah dalam kebijakan legislasi maupun regulasi harusdisusun dalam suatu grand design perubahan yang mencerminkan hakikatperlindungan hukum kepada masyarakat. Namun perlindungan hukum ini akanlebih bermakna apabila kompentensi peradilan administrasi tidak dibatasi olehketentuan sebagaimana dimaksud pasal 1 angka 9 UU PERATUN, maupunpembatasan-pembatasan hukum lainnya, namun mencakup semua tindakanhukum publik administrasi pemerintahan.

---

ABSTRACTIn historical dimension, the extension of the administrative courts jurisdiction isexercised by administrative judge as part of the judicial activism to strengthen theweakness of the Administrative Court Act no. 5/1986 (last revised on the Act no.51/2009). Unfortunately, the extension of the administrative court jurisdiction hasbeen diametrically opposed with the legal policy of legislation. The analysis willdemonstrate disharmony of the effectiveness legislation of judicial administrativecourt power, due to the lack of lawmakers grand design to build a effective andstrong judiciary system of administrative court based on the idea of Indonesianrule of law. The defective of the laws and regulations tends to be faced in reactiveapproach for building new regulation or institution. Realizing the lack of politicalwill of the lawmakers to build a effective and strong administrative court power,the reseacher propose some ideas and arguments to optimalize the power ofadministrative court by systematizing and re-thingking some actual legal issuesrelating the future of administrative court jurisdiction (ius constituendum).Relating to this topic, the researcher examine as well some of the draft bills whoseimpact to the future of the administrative court function, besides analyzing currentpolicies which has been expanding the administrative court jurisdiction in nationallaw system namely : 1) Freedom Information Act; 2) Public Service Act; 3)Legislative and Senate Election Act; 4) Enviromental Protection and ManagementAct; 5) Land Acquistition For Public Purposes Act. Finally, the researcher has aconclusion that legal policy which regulates and operates national legal system ofthe conflict resolution between the government and the citizen must be composedand designed based on a supporting grand design to promote and guarantee legalprotection for citizens. This protection would be more meaningful if thejurisdiction of the administrative court are not limited only to the specific criteriaof the administrave court decision according to article 1 figure law 9 Law No.51/2009, including another legal exemption, but also cover all the public legalaction of administrative authority."

"ABSTRAKMasalah perizinan pertambangan pada dasarnya merupakan masalah hukum administrasi. Hal ini disebabkan karena perizinan merupakan salah satu bentuk keputusan beschikking sepihak yang diberikan oleh badan atau pejabat pemerintahan kepada perusahaan tambang yang mengajukan izin tambang untuk melakukan kegiatan pertambangan. Tetapi dalam penerbitan izin, terdapat pelanggaran-pelanggaran administrasi yang pada umumnya dalam bentuk maladministrasi keberpihakan, diskriminasi, konflik kepentingan, penundaan berlarut, penyalahgunaan wewenang, penyimpangan prosedur, dan permintaan imbalan uang, barang dan jasa yang dapat mengarah ke perbuatan tindak pidana korupsi. Dalam kasus tindak pidana korupsi perizinan pertambangan, pelanggaran-pelanggaran administrasi tersebut merupakan modus operandi utama yang digunakan. Sehingga terjadi perdebatan dalam menentukan pelanggaran-pelanggaran administrasi yang merupakan ranah pertanggungjawaban administrasi yang tunduk dalam ketentuan hukum administrasi atau pertanggungjawaban tindak pidana korupsi yang tunduk dalam ketentuan hukum pidana. Dengan menggunakan penelitian yuridis normatif, penelitian ini menjawab permasalahan tersebut dengan studi kepustakaan dan kasus. Hasil penelitian ini, secara jelas menjelaskan sudut perbedaan maupun persamaan yang membedakan pelanggaran-pelanggaran administrasi yang masuk dalam ranah tindak pidana korupsi dan pelanggaran administrasi. Pertama, menyangkut subjek, perbuatan dan objek. Kedua, menyangkut penyalahgunaan wewenang. Ketiga, menyangkut kerugian negara yang terjadi akibat penerbitan izin tambang. Selain itu dalam penelitian ini juga menyajikan beberapa analisis putusan yang menggambarkan bahwa pelanggaran administrasi merupakan modus operandi utama dalam terjadinya tindak pidana korupsi perizinan pertambangan. Adanya penelitian ini mendorong pemerintah dan penegak hukum untuk melakukan penegakan hukum dalam permasalahan tindak pidana korupsi dan pelanggaran administrasi perizinan pertambangan.

---

ABSTRACTThe issues of mining licensing are essentially a matter of administrative law. Its caused because licensing is one of the unilateral decisions beschikking given by government agencies or officials to mining companies that apply for mining licenses to conduct mining activities. However, in the issuance of mining licenses, there are administrative violations generally in the form of maladministration partiality, discrimination, conflict of interest, protracted delay, abuse of power, procedural deviation, and demand for money rewards, goods and services that may lead to corruption. In the mining licensing corruption cases, the administrative violations are the main modus operandi used. So there is a debate in determining the administrative violations which are the domain of administrative responsibility which is subject to the provisions of administrative law or corruption responsibility which is subject to the provisions of criminal law. By using normative legal research, this research answered the problems by literature and case study. The result of this research, clearly explained point of similarities and differences that distinguish administrative violations in corruption responsibility and administrative responsibility. First, concerning the subjects, acts and objects. Second, concerning abuse of power. Third, concerning the state losses consequenced of the issuance of mining licenses. In addition, in this research also presented some verdicts analysis describing that administrative violations are the main modus operandi in the occurrence of corruption of mining licensing. The existence of this research encourages the government and law enforcement to enforce the law in the problem of corruption and administrative violation in mining licensing."