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 4 Documents
Search
Journal : Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan

 1 
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.
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
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