Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Repertorium: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Kenotariatan Jurnal Simbur Cahaya
Saut Parulian Panjaitan
Sriwijaya University
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
PARADIGMA KELEMBAGAAN PARTISIPASI MASYARAKAT DALAM PENYELENGGARAAN JASA KONSTRUKSI Saut Parulian Panjaitan
Repertorium: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Kenotariatan Vol 11, No 2 (2022): November 2022
Publisher : Universitas Sriwijaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.28946/rpt.v11i2.2220

Abstract

Jasa konstruksi sesungguhnya merupakan bagian strategis dan penting dalam mendukung pembangunan nasional, karena dapat menggerakkan pertumbuhan ekonomi dan meningkatkan perkembangan sosial. Salah satu tujuan penyelenggaraan jasa konstruksi melalui Undang-Undang Jasa Konstruksi adalah untuk meningkatkan partisipasi masyarakat baik secara langsung maupun tidak langsung. Akan tetapi, peraturan perundang-undangan di bidang jasa konstruksi yang mengatur mengenai kelembagaan partisipasi masyarakat dimaksud, yaitu Lembaga Pengembangan Jasa Konstruksi (LPJK), ternyata mengaturnya secara top-down. Oleh karena itu, perlu dikaji perubahan paradigma kelembagaan partisipasi masyarakat sebagai bentuk keikutsertaan masyarakat dalam penyelenggaraan jasa konstruksi ini.Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis-normatif, kajian ini menemukan bahwa pardigma kelembagaan LPJK yang pada walnya bersifat bottom-up sebagai wadah partisipasi masyarakat, kini menjadi semacam governmental body yang   bercirikan : (a) dibentuk oleh Menteri, (b) dibiayai melalui APBN, dan (c) hanya berada di Ibu Kota Negara, (d) menjalankan sebagaian kewenangan Pemerintah Pusat, (e) berada di bawah Menteri dan bertanggungjawab kepada Menteri, (f) kepengurusannya harus mendapatkan persetujuan DPR, dan (g) menjalankan tugas dan fungsi registrasi, lisensi, akreditasi, penyetaraan, dan penetapan ahli. Pada bagian lain ditemukan pula bahwa baik secara formalitas dan prosedur, peraturan pelaksana dari Undang-Undang Jasa Konstruksi bertentangan dengan perintah undang-undang dimaksud. Sehingga oleh karenanya, dapat diajukan mekanisme judicial review kepada Mahkamah Agung.
Strengthening The Authority Of The Indonesian Ombudsman In The Public Service Sector Saut Parulian Panjaitan
Simbur Cahaya Volume 29 Nomor 2, Desember 2022
Publisher : Universitas Sriwijaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (328.92 KB) | DOI: 10.28946/sc.v29i2.2149

Abstract

In the era of disruption, because of advances in communication and information technology, causing disruptions in the administration of government, which was originally based on the monopoly and power paradigm, became a public service paradigm based on the principle of good governance through e-government services. In carrying out the task of supervising public services, until now the authority of the Indonesian Ombudsman is still very limited, which can be seen from legal products in the form of recommendations that do not have legal coercion for state/government administrators who commit maladministration. On that basis, the Indonesian Ombudsman issues a regulation on the Indonesian Ombudsman which authorizes its decisions, which are final and binding, in public service disputes through an adjudication process. In fact, the position of the Indonesian Ombudsman should indeed be as an institution that only gives influence (magistratur of influence) to state/government officials in order to respect the rights of citizens in public services. To strengthen the authority of the Indonesian Ombudsman, it is carried out (a) strengthening the constitutional position of the Indonesian Ombusman, (b) clarifying the scope of supervision by the Ombudsman, both regarding what things can be monitored and to whom the supervision can be carried out, (c) formulating threats sanctions for public service officials who do not implement the Ombudsman's recommendations in reports of violations of public services,  (d) formulate the Ombudsman's authority that is active-preventive, and (e) formulate coercive power against the Ombudsman's recommendations as an effort to improve the quality of public services.  
Co-Authors