KUALIFIKASI TINDAKAN FAKTUAL SEBAGAI OBJEK SENGKETA PTUN PASCA UU ADMINISTRASI PEMERINTAHAN

Abstract

Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration has brought a paradigm shift in State Administrative Law by expanding the dispute objects in the State Administrative Court (PTUN). Previously limited to written decisions (KTUN), this expansion now includes factual actions (feitelijke handelingen) of the government. However, this raises legal uncertainty regarding the qualification of factual actions that can be sued and the absolute competence limits of PTUN. This research aims to analyze the criteria for factual actions that can become dispute objects in PTUN and examine the legal consequences and limits of PTUN's authority in adjudicating them. This normative legal research uses statutory and conceptual approaches. The results show that factual actions can be qualified as dispute objects if they meet cumulative criteria: carried out by government officials in a public legal capacity, concrete and real, causing detrimental legal consequences, and violating the principle of legality or Good Corporate Governance (AUPB). Regarding legal consequences, arbitrary factual actions cause material and immaterial losses, giving rise to claims for compensation. Furthermore, aligned with Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) Number 2 of 2019, disputes over Unlawful Acts by the Government (Onrechtmatige Overheidsdaad) shifted from General Courts to PTUN's absolute competence, provided they stem purely from public authority