<![CDATA[Although civil service disputes involving the state civil apparatus (ASN) and the application of the General Principles of Good Governance (AUPB) have been widely examined, analysis of ASN performance assessment as an object of dispute over governmental action and legal protection for the position of Regional Secretary in State Administrative Court Decision Number 34/G/TF/2024/PTUN.BJM remains limited. This study aims to analyze the conformity of the actions of the Regent of Banjar Regency in assessing the performance of the Regional Secretary based on the AUPB and to evaluate the legal protection provided by the decision for ASN positional rights. This study employed a normative legal method using statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. Primary legal materials included laws and regulations and State Administrative Court Decision Number 34/G/TF/2024/PTUN.BJM, while secondary legal materials comprised literature and scholarly journals collected through library research and analyzed descriptively and analytically. The results of the study show that the Regent’s action in assigning the performance rating of “Very Poor” did not comply with the principles of the AUPB because it was not based on monitoring, performance dialogue, guidance, feedback, the establishment of a Performance Appraisal Team, or assessment documents that fulfilled formal requirements. The State Administrative Court decision provided legal protection for ASN from arbitrary personnel actions, but it still leaves ambiguity regarding the legal consequences of unsigned assessment documents and the relationship between organizational performance achievement and the individual assessment of senior executive officials. These findings contribute to the development of administrative law scholarship, particularly the application of the AUPB, the merit system, and legal protection for ASN in civil service disputes. The conclusion of the study affirms that compliance with performance assessment procedures and the application of the merit system are prerequisites for objective, professional, transparent, accountable, and equitable civil service governance.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
