This article examines the distance between the legal effect of annulment and the factual changes required after a judgment of the Indonesian Administrative Court becomes final. The study finds that the current framework is better at recording formal revocation than demonstrating the actual recovery of rights. This difficulty arises from orders lacking specific intended end states, fragmented administrative records, blurred responsibilities, and performance measures emphasizing procedural closure. The article proposes an outcome-based enforcement model that separates immediate prohibitions from technical implementation periods, requiring implementation plans, documentary proof, claimant confirmation, and judicial determination of completed restoration.
Copyrights © 2026