BibTex Citation Data :
@article{MMH20764, author = {Enrico Simanjuntak}, title = {RESTATEMENT TENTANG YURIDIKSI PERADILAN MENGADILI PERBUATAN MELAWAN HUKUM PEMERINTAH (RESTATEMENT ON JUDICIAL JURISDICTION IN ADMINISTRATIVE TORT)}, journal = {Masalah-Masalah Hukum}, volume = {48}, number = {1}, year = {2019}, keywords = {Administrative court; Government Administration Act; administrative torts}, abstract = { One of the crucial problems after enactment of Government Administration Act (UUAP) concerns the extent to which the scope of court jurisdiction relating administrative torts (onrechtmatige overheidsdaad) or OOD , as intended in Article 1365 of the Civil Code. There are at least two different views on the issue. First, administrative court mutatis mutandis has power to resolve the case relating onrechtmatige overheidsdaad, this view is represented by Supreme Court Circular or Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung (SEMA) No. 4/2016. A different view holds that the OOD act is a genus whereas the factual act as referred to UUAP is a species. This second view is not mutatis mutandis totally transferring the authority of civil judges to administrative court try the OOD case. This difference of opinion is important to be studied more thoroughly in order to know the real issue of the different views. }, issn = {2527-4716}, pages = {32--48} doi = {10.14710/mmh.48.1.2019.32-48}, url = {https://ejournal.undip.ac.id/index.php/mmh/article/view/20764} }
Refworks Citation Data :
One of the crucial problems after enactment of Government Administration Act (UUAP) concerns the extent to which the scope of court jurisdiction relating administrative torts (onrechtmatige overheidsdaad) or OOD, as intended in Article 1365 of the Civil Code. There are at least two different views on the issue. First, administrative court mutatis mutandis has power to resolve the case relating onrechtmatige overheidsdaad, this view is represented by Supreme Court Circular or Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung (SEMA) No. 4/2016. A different view holds that the OOD act is a genus whereas the factual act as referred to UUAP is a species. This second view is not mutatis mutandis totally transferring the authority of civil judges to administrative court try the OOD case. This difference of opinion is important to be studied more thoroughly in order to know the real issue of the different views.
Article Metrics:
Last update:
Controversy on the Absolute Competency of Civil Courts in Investigating Unlawful Actions Committed by the Government In Indonesia
Last update: 2025-07-04 15:41:46
The Authors submitting a manuscript do so on the understanding that if accepted for publication, copyright of the article shall be assigned to Masalah Masalah Hukum journal (MMH) and Faculty of Law, Universitas Diponegoro as publisher of the journal. Copyright encompasses rights to reproduce and deliver the article in all form and media, including reprints, photographs, microfilms, and any other similar reproductions, as well as translations.
MMH journal and Faculty of Law, Universitas Diponegoro and the Editors make every effort to ensure that no wrong or misleading data, opinions or statements be published in the journal. In any way, the contents of the articles and advertisements published in MMH journal are the sole responsibility of their respective authors and advertisers.
We strongly encourage that manuscripts be submitted to online journal system in http://ejournal.undip.ac.id/index.php/mmh/index. Authors are required to create an account and submit the manuscripts online. For submission inquiries, please follow the submission instructions in the website. If the author has any problems on the online submission, please contact Editorial Office at the following email: jurnal.mmh@undip.ac.id or jurnal.mmh@gmail.com
Contributors are responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce any materials, including photographs and illustrations, for which they do not hold the copyright and for ensuring that the appropriate acknowledgments are included in the manuscript.