Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.947
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Masalah-Masalah Hukum Jurnal Dinamika Hukum Jurnal Media Hukum DE LEGA LATA: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Indonesian Journal of Law and Policy Studies Jurnal Hukum Peratun Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Journal of Law and Legal Reform
Tri Cahya Indra Permana, Tri Cahya Indra
Magister Hukum, Universitas Muhammadiyah Tangerang
Economics, Econometrics & Finance Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 12 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 12 Documents
Search

 1   2 
USULAN RUMUSAN HUKUM ACARA (IUS CONSTITUENDUM) PENGUJIAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN DI BAWAH UNDANG-UNDANG OLEH MAHKAMAH AGUNG Effendi, Maftuh; Cahya Indra Permana, Tri
Jurnal Media Hukum Vol 25, No 1, June 2018
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18196/jmh.2018.0099.31-39

Abstract

The implementation of juridical control of the legislation under the law by the Supreme Court through judicial review until nowadays was not running optimally. One of the causes of the less optimal quality of the decision to test regulations under the law was the absence of procedural law for the testing of material test rights that can accommodate the needs of the proceedings. These article wishes to propose a number of ideas so that in the future the MA will begin to discuss the procedural law for the testing of laws and regulations under the Act through trials that were open to the public. This is based on the principle that disputes in the laws and regulations under the Act not only examine juridical aspects, but also facts, and the decisions are final and binding, so that they have a broad impact on the public. Therefore, it is necessary to develop material on the contents of the procedural law for the testing of laws and regulations under a law that reflects the principle of fairness in order to increase public trust.
USULAN RUMUSAN HUKUM ACARA (IUS CONSTITUENDUM) PENGUJIAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN DI BAWAH UNDANG-UNDANG OLEH MAHKAMAH AGUNG Effendi, Maftuh; Cahya Indra Permana, Tri
Jurnal Media Hukum Vol 25, No 1, June 2018
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18196/jmh.2018.0099.31-39

Abstract

The implementation of juridical control of the legislation under the law by the Supreme Court through judicial review until nowadays was not running optimally. One of the causes of the less optimal quality of the decision to test regulations under the law was the absence of procedural law for the testing of material test rights that can accommodate the needs of the proceedings. These article wishes to propose a number of ideas so that in the future the MA will begin to discuss the procedural law for the testing of laws and regulations under the Act through trials that were open to the public. This is based on the principle that disputes in the laws and regulations under the Act not only examine juridical aspects, but also facts, and the decisions are final and binding, so that they have a broad impact on the public. Therefore, it is necessary to develop material on the contents of the procedural law for the testing of laws and regulations under a law that reflects the principle of fairness in order to increase public trust.
WEWENANG BADAN PENGAWAS KEUANGAN DAN PEMBANGUNAN (BPKP) MENGHITUNG KERUGIAN KEUANGAN NEGARA / THE AUTHORITY OF FINANCIAL AND DEVELOPMENT MONITORING AGENCY IN AUDITING THE STATE FINANCIAL LOSSES TRI CAHYA INDRA PERMANA
Jurnal Hukum Peratun Vol 1 No 1 (2018)
Publisher : Puslitbang Hukum dan Peradilan bekerja sama dengan Ditjen Badimiltun

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/peratun.112018.%p

Abstract

Dengan diterbitkannya Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2016 yang menyatakan Instansi yang berwenang menyatakan ada tidaknya kerugian keuangan Negara adalah Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan, kewenangan BPKP untuk menghitung atau mengaudit kerugian keuangan negara tetap ada. Adapun kewenangan BPKP yang tidak diperbolehkan adalah men-declare atau menyatakan adanya kerugian keuangan negara. Hal tersebut sesuai dengan beberapa putusan badan peradilan, baik putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi, putusan Pengadilan Tindak Pidana Korupsi maupun putusan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara.With the enactment of Supreme Court Letter Number 4 Year 2016 who said that the authorized agency in declaring the state financial losses is BPK (Financial Examiners Board), Authorization of BPKP (Financial and Developmen Monitoring Agency) in auditing/counting state financial losses still exist. This is in accordance with some of court decisions such as constitutional court and both criminal court and administrative court.
ASAS-ASAS UMUM PEMERINTAHAN YANG BAIK YANG BERKEMBANG MELALUI PUTUSAN HAKIM Tri Cahya Indra Permana
Indonesian Journal of Law and Policy Studies Vol 1, No 1 (2020): Indonesian Journal of Law and Policy Studies
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Tangerang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31000/ijlp.v1i1.2657

Abstract

General principles of good governance developed by judge decision. Those general principles must be obeyed by government officials. Some of new principles made by judges among other things : principles of ultra petita, principles of prohibition of issued a decree who has been cancelled by the court, and principles of government foult can not disadvantage people. The aim of the developing  general principles of good governance is to solve the administrative law problems.
MODEL PENYELESAIAN PERSELISIHAN PARTAI POLITIK SECARA INTERNAL MAUPUN EKSTERNAL Tri Cahya Indra Permana
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 5, No 1 (2016)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.5.1.2016.35-52

Abstract

Political parties act stipulates that a political party dispute resolved internally by the Mahkamah Partai or other designation of that and externally resolved by the District Court and the Supreme Court. The dispute substance in Mahkamah Partai which is final and binding is about organization dispute, the other can be settled in District Court and the Supreme Court. In practice, that arrangement makes the decision apart from the sense of justice, legal certainty and utility. Therefore, these rules should be revised so that the regulation of PAW, violations of the rights of members of political parties, abuse of authority, financial liability, or an objection to the decision of political parties (including the decision not to decide on something) is final and binding through Mahkamah Partai decision. While the organization disputes can be submitted to the Constitutional Court for legal action.Keywords : political party dispute, Mahkamah Partai, Supreme Court,Constitutional Court
DINAMIKA SIKAP PTUN TERHADAP SENGKETA PEMILIHAN KEPALA DAERAH / THE DYNAMICS OF ADMINISTRATIVE COURT POSITION AGAINST REGIONAL ELECTION DISPUTE Tri Cahya Indra Permana
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 7, No 2 (2018)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.7.2.2018.175-194

Abstract

Pada masa sebelum diundangkannya Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 juncto Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2015, sikap PTUN terhadap sengketa Pilkada sangat beragam mulai dari tidak lolos dismisal, lolos dismissal tetapi ditolak atau dinyatakan tidak diterima (N.O.) oleh Majelis Hakim, bahkan ada yang gugatan dikabulkan. Setelah diundangkannya Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 junctis Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2015 dan Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 2016, sikap PTUN hanya 1 (satu) dan sangat tegas yaitu menyatakan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara secara absolut tidak berwenang memeriksa, memutus dan menyelesaikan sengketa Pilkada. Dinamika dan perubahan sikap PTUN tersebut dikarenakan adanya perubahan keadaan hukum dan maksud-maksud lain, yaitu PTUN ingin memaksimalkan lembaga-lembaga yang nyata-nyata diberi wewenang untuk menyelesaikan sengketa pada setiap tahap mulai dari sengketa administrasi sampai dengan sengketa hasil, menghindari disparitas putusan PTUN dengan putusan MK, membangun budaya hukum masyarakat yang siap menang dan siap kalah, serta menghindari sengketa yang berkepanjangan yang menghabiskan banyak tenaga, waktu, dan biaya.In the days before the Law number 1 of 2015 in conjunction with Law number 8 of 2015 issued, the position of Administrative Court against dispute of regional election is varied, among other things: failed dismissal process, not accepted, rejected and even granted. So, after Law number 1 of 2015 in conjunction with Law number 8 of 2015 and Law number 10 of 2016 issued, there is only one administrative court position which is very firm stated that administrative court is absolutely not authorized judging the dispute of regional election. A change of administrative court position was due to the changes in legal circumstances and other aims among other things: administrative court want to maximize the institutions that given authority to resolve dispute of regional election, avoid disparity of decisions between administrative court decisions and constitutional court decisions, build culture the laws of society that ready to win and ready to lost also avoid prolonged dispute that consumes a lot of energy, time and costs.
Intersection of Jurisdictional Competence between Administrative Court, District Court, and Tax Court in Adjudicating Unlawful Acts by Government Bodies and/or Officials Permana, Tri Cahya Indra; Amiludin, Amiludin
DE LEGA LATA: JURNAL ILMU HUKUM Vol 9, No 2 (2024): July-December
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30596/dll.v9i2.20384

Abstract

The jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes involving unlawful acts by Government Bodies and/or Officials encompasses three institutions, namely the Administrative Court, District Court, and Tax Court. The Administrative Court has authority to adjudicate all disputes involving unlawful acts by Government Bodies and/or Officials, except those specifically designated under the jurisdiction of the District Court and Tax Court. The District Court is empowered to adjudicate citizen lawsuits and breach of contracts committed by Government Bodies and/or Officials. Meanwhile, the Tax Court has jurisdiction to adjudicate factual actions in the field of taxation, customs, and/or excise by the Directorate General of Taxes or the Directorate General of Customs and Excise as stipulated in Article 31 of Law Number 14 of 2002 concerning Tax Court
PERADILAN TATA USAHA NEGARA PASCA UNDANG-UNDANG ADMINISTRASI PEMERINTAHAN DITINJAU DARI SEGI ACCESS TO JUSTICE Tri Cahya Indra Permana
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 4, No 3 (2015)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.4.3.2015.419-442

Abstract

The Government Administration Act has expanded the access to justice for justice seekers in Administrative Court by opening the "empty spaces" that were not previously accessible for justice seekers. Hence Government Administration Act has opened access to justice, the Judge as the central figure of law enforcement should also committed to changes and developments, including changes and legal developments in the field of Government Administration. Access to justice is a human right that must be guaranteed, not just move the absolute power of the other judicial authority to the Administrative Court. His attempt is to cover the empty space/ vacuum which cannot be filled by the Administrative Court and other courts. The Administrative Court Judge are no longer narrow the authorization of Administrative Court on the pretext object of the dispute is not individual, not final, civil disputes especially since the disputed a declarative decision. The judge would have to implement the content of Government Administration Act along with the Supreme Court Regulation No. 4 of 2015 and the Supreme Court Regulation No. 5 Year 2015. To avoid disagreement of the law, the new law is applied with some implementation strategies that really understood what the intent and purpose of the Government Administration Act, including the rules of procedure. However, if in the Rules of the Supreme Court felt there are things that are not in accordance with the Law or the needs of the practice of the trial, the judge can make an effort constitutional question to the Constitutional Court or temporarily set it aside pending the revision of the Rules of the Supreme Court No. 4 of 2015 and the Supreme Court Regulation No. 5 in 2015.Keywords: Administrative Court, Government Administration Act, Access to Justice
Granting Priority Rights and Compensation to Owners of Destroyed Land Tri Cahya Indra Permana; Sri Wahyu Handayani; Kamilah Wati bt Mohd
Jurnal Dinamika Hukum Vol 23, No 3 (2023)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20884/1.jdh.2023.23.3.3505

Abstract

Soil possesses unique properties. This is due to the fact that, on one hand, land is a non-biological resource, implying that it cannot naturally regenerate in abundance. This research aims to analyze the significance of granting priority right and compensation to owners of destroyed land. This research adopts normative legal research approach. The result of this research reveals that the Regulation of the Minister of ATR/Head of BPN Number 17 of 2021 was issued to regulate the procedure for determining the destruction of land. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court opines that Article 15 paragraph (1) of the regulation fails to uphold a sense of justice and is contrary to higher laws and regulations.Keywords: Granting Priority Rights, Compensation, Owner of Destroyed Land.
DINAMIKA SIKAP PTUN TERHADAP SENGKETA PEMILIHAN KEPALA DAERAH / THE DYNAMICS OF ADMINISTRATIVE COURT POSITION AGAINST REGIONAL ELECTION DISPUTE Permana, Tri Cahya Indra
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 7 No 2 (2018)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.7.2.2018.175-194

Abstract

Pada masa sebelum diundangkannya Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 juncto Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2015, sikap PTUN terhadap sengketa Pilkada sangat beragam mulai dari tidak lolos dismisal, lolos dismissal tetapi ditolak atau dinyatakan tidak diterima (N.O.) oleh Majelis Hakim, bahkan ada yang gugatan dikabulkan. Setelah diundangkannya Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 junctis Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2015 dan Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 2016, sikap PTUN hanya 1 (satu) dan sangat tegas yaitu menyatakan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara secara absolut tidak berwenang memeriksa, memutus dan menyelesaikan sengketa Pilkada. Dinamika dan perubahan sikap PTUN tersebut dikarenakan adanya perubahan keadaan hukum dan maksud-maksud lain, yaitu PTUN ingin memaksimalkan lembaga-lembaga yang nyata-nyata diberi wewenang untuk menyelesaikan sengketa pada setiap tahap mulai dari sengketa administrasi sampai dengan sengketa hasil, menghindari disparitas putusan PTUN dengan putusan MK, membangun budaya hukum masyarakat yang siap menang dan siap kalah, serta menghindari sengketa yang berkepanjangan yang menghabiskan banyak tenaga, waktu, dan biaya.In the days before the Law number 1 of 2015 in conjunction with Law number 8 of 2015 issued, the position of Administrative Court against dispute of regional election is varied, among other things: failed dismissal process, not accepted, rejected and even granted. So, after Law number 1 of 2015 in conjunction with Law number 8 of 2015 and Law number 10 of 2016 issued, there is only one administrative court position which is very firm stated that administrative court is absolutely not authorized judging the dispute of regional election. A change of administrative court position was due to the changes in legal circumstances and other aims among other things: administrative court want to maximize the institutions that given authority to resolve dispute of regional election, avoid disparity of decisions between administrative court decisions and constitutional court decisions, build culture the laws of society that ready to win and ready to lost also avoid prolonged dispute that consumes a lot of energy, time and costs.
Co-Authors Ahmad Ahmad Amiludin, Amiludin Kamilah Wati bt Mohd Maftuh Effendi, Maftuh Sri Wahyu Handayani