<![CDATA[The determination of the 2025 Regency/City Minimum Wage (UMK) in East Java Province attracted significant attention from the perspective of administrative law after the Governor of East Java established minimum wages that did not fully comply with the calculation formula stipulated in the Minister of Manpower Regulation Number 16 of 2024. The policy was justified on the basis of administrative discretion considering regional economic conditions and business sustainability, and subsequently became the subject of litigation before the State Administrative Court, culminating in Decision Number 65/B/2025/PT.TUN.SBY of the Surabaya State Administrative High Court. This study aims to examine the validity of the Governor's exercise of discretion under Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration. This normative legal research applies statutory and case approaches. Primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials are analyzed using prescriptive legal reasoning. The findings indicate that the Governor's exercise of discretion failed to satisfy the legal requirements because there was neither a legal vacuum nor governmental stagnation justifying the use of discretion. Furthermore, the Governor's decision conflicted with statutory regulations, violated the General Principles of Good Governance, and deviated from the objectives of discretion stipulated in Articles 22 and 24 of Law Number 30 of 2014. The Surabaya State Administrative High Court reaffirmed that the Governor's authority in determining the UMK constitutes bound authority (gebonden bevoegdheid), thereby preventing deviations from the nationally prescribed wage formula through discretionary power. This study contributes to the development of Indonesian administrative law by clarifying the legal limits of administrative discretion in regional governance.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
