EXECUTION OF NON-EXECUTABLE COURT DECISIONS IN CASE NO. 757/PDT.G/2022/PN.JKT.PST
Universitas Bhayangkara Surabaya
Universitas Bhayangkara Surabaya
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56943/jmr.v3i1.625Judges play an important role in upholding justice as they are responsible for resolving cases and ensuring that the law is applied fairly. While their decisions are necessary to resolve cases, the fact is that they cause controversy for many parties. Judges are expected to consider law, justice, expediency, and legal certainty in making decisions. This research topic is an important and necessary study to determine the causes of Decision No. 757/Pdt.G/2022/PN.Jkt.Pst being non-executable and the legal remedies for the execution of the decision. This research is a normative juridical research using primary legal materials and secondary legal materials to obtain a comprehensive understanding. Meanwhile, this research approach uses a statutory approach, conceptual approach and case approach. The result of this research is that the judge's decision in the case between Prima Party and General Election Commission was flawed in several ways. The decision exceeded the authority of the judge, did not provide legal certainty, could have an impact on the postponement of the 2024 elections, and was ordered to be implemented immediately without following proper procedures and therefore should be considered a non-executable decision. This decision will also affect third parties, which are all legal subjects who are not parties to the civil case. Legal remedies that can be taken by the parties are to continue to take legal remedies by filing a complaint to the Supreme Court Internal Supervisory Board and submitting a report to the Judicial Commission.
Keywords: Decision No. 757/Pdt.G/2022/PN.Jkt.Pst Execution of Court Decision Non-Executable
Annisa. (2023). Pengertian Kesadaran Hukum dan Pentingnya Dalam Masyarakat. Fakultas Hukum Terbaik Di Medan Sumut. https://fahum.umsu.ac.id/pengertian-kesadaran-hukum-dan-pentingnya-dalam-masyarakat/
Araszkiewicz, M. (2023). Conceptual Structures in Statutory Interpretation. https://doi.org/10.3233/FAIA230952
Asikin, Z. (2018). Hukum Acara Perdata di Indonesia. Prenadamedia Group.
Asnawi, N. (2014). Hermeuneutika Putusan Hakim. UUI Press.
Azizah, F. N., Kholifah, N., & Farhani, A. (2023). Penguatan Etika Profesi Hakim Dalam Mewujudkan Penegakan Hukum. SALAM: Jurnal Sosial Dan Budaya Syar-I, 10(2), 661–682. https://doi.org/10.15408/sjsbs.v10i2.32137
Engst, B. G. (2021). The First Face of Judicial Power. In The Two Faces of Judicial Power (pp. 117–167). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46016-7_4
Evangelina Nikolaevna, G. (2023). The Principle of Legal Certainty: Concept and Main Characteristics. Advances in Sciences and Humanities. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ash.20230902.18
Fahira, M. A., & Fahmi, S. N. A. (2022). Professional Ethics of Judges in Court. MILRev : Metro Islamic Law Review, 1(2), 176. https://doi.org/10.32332/milrev.v1i2.6207
Haarala-Muhonen, A., Hyytinen, H., Tuononen, T., & Melander, S. (2022). Law Students’ Descriptions of Legal Reasoning. The Law Teacher, 56(4), 471–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2022.2057754
Hadrian, E., & Hakim, L. (2020). Hukum Acara Perdata Di Indonesia: Permasalahan Eksekusi dan Mediasi. Deepublish.
Hahn, J. (2022). The Effectiveness of the Law. In Foundations of a Sociology of Canon Law (pp. 179–222). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-01791-9_6
Harahap, Y. (2023). Ruang Lingkup Permasalahan Ekseskusi Bidang Perdata. Sinar Grafika.
Harding, C., & Cronin, A. (2022). Regulation in Theory: Challenging the Underlying Assumptions. In Bad Business Practice. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439734.00014
Hasbi, & Anwar, S. (2016). Referensi: Sistem Peradilan Dana Asuransi Sebagai Objek Waris. La Tansa Mahsiro Publisher.
Hipan, N. (2017). Tinjauan Tentang Gugatan Tidak Dapat Diterima pada Perkara Perdata di Pengadilan Negeri (Studi Terhadap Beberapa Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Luwuk). Jurnal Yustisiabel, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.32529/yustisiabel.v1i1.403
Holzenberger, N., & Van Durme, B. (2021). Factoring Statutory Reasoning as Language Understanding Challenges. Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers), 2742–2758. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.213
Ivanov, N. G. (2024). The Principle of Legal Certainty. Lobbying in the Legislative Process, 3(3), 11–15. https://doi.org/10.33693/2782-7372-2024-3-3-11-15
Janderová, J., & Hubálková, P. (2021). Legal Certainty – Protected Values and Partial Objectives: The Case of the Czech Republic. Central European Public Administration Review, 19(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2021.1.03
Jončić, S. (2018). Conflict of the Authority of Judicial Power and Non-Judicial Institutions. Strani Pravni Zivot, 4, 51–71. https://doi.org/10.5937/spz0-20371
Lambais, G., & Sigstad, H. (2023). Judicial subversion: The effects of political power on court outcomes. Journal of Public Economics, 217, 104788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2022.104788
Mumford, J., Atkinson, K., & Bench-Capon, T. (2022). Reasoning with Legal Cases: A Hybrid ADF-ML Approach. https://doi.org/10.3233/FAIA220452
N., A. Z., & A., P. S. (2022). An Legal Protection for Termination Post the Court Decisions Are Still Powerful. SunText Review of Economics & Business, 03(04). https://doi.org/10.51737/2766-4775.2022.072
Rahmawati, S. N., & Sumaryanto, D. (2022). Legal Protection for Human Trafficking. YURIS (Journal of Court and Justice), 1(4), 34–40. https://journal.jfpublisher.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/209
Reshota, V., Zabolotna, H., Reshota, O., Hliborob, N., & Dzhokh, R. (2022). Judicial Decisions as a Source of Law. Cuestiones Políticas, 40(72), 353–367. https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4072.19
Salam, S. (2023). Legal Protection of Indigenous Institutions in the Frame of the Rule of Law (Perspective of Legal Protection Theory). Cepalo, 7(1), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.25041/cepalo.v7no1.2898
Shcherbanyuk, O. V., Gordieiev, V., & Bzova, L. G. (2023). Legal Nature of the Principle of Legal Certainty as a Component Element of the Rule of Law. Juridical Tribune, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.24818/TBJ/2023/13/1.02
Singh, S. K. (2024). Exploring the Impact of Judicial Activism on Legal Precedent: A Comparative Analysis. Indian Journal of Law, 2(2), 23–26. https://doi.org/10.36676/ijl.v2.i2.06
Suharsono, Zaim, M., Tua, H. P., & Jamaludin, N. (2023). Etika Profesi Hakim. Al-Rasῑkh: Jurnal Hukum Islam, 12(1), 60–69. https://doi.org/10.38073/rasikh.v12i1.1110
Sunandar, N. (2021). Eksekusi Putusan Perdata: Proses Eksekusi dalam Tataran Teori dan Praktik. Nuansa Cendekia.
Tsvigun, I. (2024). The Impact of Precedent on the Development of Ukrainian Private Law Suggested. Law, Policy and Security, 2(1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.62566/lps/1.2024.58
Tulián, M. (2016). Sustratos Ideológicos y Compromisos éticos en Las Decisiones Judiciales. Argumentos. Estudios Transdisciplinarios Sobre Culturas Juridicas y Administración de La Justicia, 2016(2), 81–99. https://doi.org/10.26612/2525-0469/2016.2.06
