KEWENANGAN OMBUDSMAN DALAM PENYELESAIAN PENGADUAN PELAYANAN PUBLIK
Total View This Week0
Total View This Week0
Institusion
Universitas Katolik Darma Cendika
Author
Lawati, Eufemia
Subject
K Law (General)
Datestamp
2021-03-02 15:58:02
Abstract :
The public service officer is an officer, officer, officer and every person working within the organizing organization in charge of carrying out actions or a series of public service actions. Implementers in public services should be based on the provision of public services or AAUPB. But the requirement is very unfortunate because, the reality in the fled of performance of public service implementers not in accordance with the principles of public service delivery, thus causing maladministration in public services. To prevent maladministration is formet special agency that handles maladministration in public service, the institution is Ombudsman which is a state institution in charge of supervising the public service. The provisions of article 46 of law No. 25 2009 concerning public services, ombudsman shall receive and have the authority to process complaints from the public, including adjudication. The authority of the Ombudsman through an adjudication decisions is not final and is not binding on the parties, because the result of the adjucications decision only has a value as a recommendation. Based on the above explanation, then the problem is the process of settlement of complaints of public services, an legal certainty adjudications decisions by the Ombudsman in the completion of public services. To find the answer to the problem, then there are several methods used. Firts, the type of normative juridical research; secondly, the research approach is a legal and conceptual approach; third, the type of legal materials used in the research namely, primary and secondary legal materials; fourth, the process of collecting and analyzing legal materials is to review the law No. 25 of 2009 on public service and law No. 37 of 2008 the Ombudsman. With the method used in this research, so it can answer the problem in carefully. The answer of the problem under study is, firstly based on the task and authority given to the Ombudsman, that the process of completion of complaints of public service by Ombudsman that is, the settlement of maladministration reported by the community consist of the examination of the substance of the community; investigation; clarification; conciliation; recommendation; adjudication; monitoring; and completion of maladministration on its own initiative. The second answer is that the adjudications decision by the Ombudsman does not provide legal certainty to the parties because the Ombudsman is not a judge or a judgment. This means that the adjudications decision is not final an not binding for the parties so further legal effort is needed to obtain legal certainty for the parties. The results of the study, it is suggested that the necessary amendment of article 1 paragraph (11) of law No. 25 of 2009 on public services, which places the adjudication process the adjudication process of litigation. Then it is necessary to change in article 1 paragraph (7) of law No. 37 of 2008 on the Ombudsman, that the recommendation becomes one the points in the dictum of the court decision.
The public service officer is an officer, officer, officer and every person working within the organizing organization in charge of carrying out actions or a series of public service actions. Implementers in public services should be based on the provision of public services or AAUPB. But the requirement is very unfortunate because, the reality in the fled of performance of public service implementers not in accordance with the principles of public service delivery, thus causing maladministration in public services. To prevent maladministration is formet special agency that handles maladministration in public service, the institution is Ombudsman which is a state institution in charge of supervising the public service. The provisions of article 46 of law No. 25 2009 concerning public services, ombudsman shall receive and have the authority to process complaints from the public, including adjudication. The authority of the Ombudsman through an adjudication decisions is not final and is not binding on the parties, because the result of the adjucications decision only has a value as a recommendation. Based on the above explanation, then the problem is the process of settlement of complaints of public services, an legal certainty adjudications decisions by the Ombudsman in the completion of public services. To find the answer to the problem, then there are several methods used. Firts, the type of normative juridical research; secondly, the research approach is a legal and conceptual approach; third, the type of legal materials used in the research namely, primary and secondary legal materials; fourth, the process of collecting and analyzing legal materials is to review the law No. 25 of 2009 on public service and law No. 37 of 2008 the Ombudsman. With the method used in this research, so it can answer the problem in carefully. The answer of the problem under study is, firstly based on the task and authority given to the Ombudsman, that the process of completion of complaints of public service by Ombudsman that is, the settlement of maladministration reported by the community consist of the examination of the substance of the community; investigation; clarification; conciliation; recommendation; adjudication; monitoring; and completion of maladministration on its own initiative. The second answer is that the adjudications decision by the Ombudsman does not provide legal certainty to the parties because the Ombudsman is not a judge or a judgment. This means that the adjudications decision is not final an not binding for the parties so further legal effort is needed to obtain legal certainty for the parties. The results of the study, it is suggested that the necessary amendment of article 1 paragraph (11) of law No. 25 of 2009 on public services, which places the adjudication process the adjudication process of litigation. Then it is necessary to change in article 1 paragraph (7) of law No. 37 of 2008 on the Ombudsman, that the recommendation becomes one the points in the dictum of the court decision.
Download
book
BibTex
Latex, Jabref
cloud_download
Original Resource
url resource Institution
