Publication Search

The third amendment to Law Number 1 of 2025 on State-Owned Enterprises has presented several juridical issues that need to be studied in depth, one of which is related to the establishment of the Daya Anagata Nusantara Investment Management Agency (Danantara). One of the main issues is the lack of public participation in drafting regulations, both at the planning stage and the formulation of legal norms. In addition, the existence of Danantara, which adopts the Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF) model, raises the potential for overlap with a similar institution, the Indonesia Investment Authority (INA), which was established earlier. Provisions regarding the filling of organ positions, exceptions to the definition of state finances and losses, and weak external oversight mechanisms further strengthen concerns about irregularities in governance. These conditions are potentially at odds with the general principles of good governance (AAUPB), the Law on Government Administration, the Law on State Ministries, and the Law on the Eradication of Corruption. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the establishment of the Daya Anagata Nusantara Investment Management Agency (Danantara), focusing on the legal basis for its establishment and its compatibility with the principles of constitutional law and government administration in Indonesia.

That every decision issued and/or action taken by state administration officials must be based on statutory regulations and General Principles of Good Government (AAUPB). In accordance with Article 9 paragraph (1) of Law no. 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration, but in practice there are still many government officials who abuse their authority, therefore the existence of PTUN is a tool of control over government actions as well as a medium for the public to seek justice for government actions. Where the Ptun has the authority to resolve TUN disputes, as well as provide legal protection to the community for legal actions taken by the government through the PTUN. This research uses normative research using a conceptual and statutory approach. The legal materials used are: primary legal materials in the form of statutory regulations, secondary legal materials in the form of books, journals, articles and other legal doctrines. The legal material collection technique uses descriptive analysis. It can be concluded that the role of Ptun is in providing legal protection to citizens against detrimental administrative decisions, namely through supervision, giving administrative sanctions to government officials who do not implement court decisions, up to the execution of court decisions in the form of revoking government decisions.

Alinea Keempat Preambule Konstitusi menetapkan bahwa tujuan nasional negara Indonesia satu di antaranya adalah “memajukan kesejahteraan”. Pemerintah mempunyai tanggung jawab melayani masyarakat untuk merealisasikan tujuan nasional ini yang kemudian dijalankan melalui pemberian wewenang kepada Pegawai Negeri Sipil sebagai agen dalam pelayanan masyarakat. Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 53 Tahun 2010 mengatur mengenai disiplin Pegawai Negeri Sipil yang dalam praktiknya menimbulkan sengketa kepegawaian yang merupakan bagian dari sengketa TUN dan yang menjadi pihak penggugat adalah PNS serta objek gugatannya adalah KTUN pada bidang kepegawaian yang dasar pengajuan gugatannya adalah karena dianggap bertentangan dengan perundang-undangan yang berlaku serta AAUPB. Dalam penyelesaiannya, dapat ditempuh dari dua prosedur, yakni melalui jalur “Keberatan” dan jalur “Banding Administratif”.

This article discusses the legal status of WALHI Bali in filing a lawsuit at the Bali Governor's Court regarding Bali Governor's Decree No. 1.051/03-L/HK/2012. The method used in this research is normative legal method. The focus of this research is to examine PTUN decisions with case registration number: 01/G/2013/PTUN.Dps, as well as to analyze the existence of AAUPB violations in the issuance of the Bali Governor's Decree, as well as to ensure the proper implementation of AAUPB in the preparation and issuance of the Governor's Warrant according to observations Panel of Judges in Decision No: 01/G/2013/PTUN. dps