Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2019 - 2024
0
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Hukum Peratun Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan
TRI CAHYA INDRA PERMANA
Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Jakarta
Economics, Econometrics & Finance Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
WEWENANG BADAN PENGAWAS KEUANGAN DAN PEMBANGUNAN (BPKP) MENGHITUNG KERUGIAN KEUANGAN NEGARA / THE AUTHORITY OF FINANCIAL AND DEVELOPMENT MONITORING AGENCY IN AUDITING THE STATE FINANCIAL LOSSES TRI CAHYA INDRA PERMANA
Jurnal Hukum Peratun Vol 1 No 1 (2018)
Publisher : Puslitbang Hukum dan Peradilan bekerja sama dengan Ditjen Badimiltun

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/peratun.112018.%p

Abstract

Dengan diterbitkannya Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2016 yang menyatakan Instansi yang berwenang menyatakan ada tidaknya kerugian keuangan Negara adalah Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan, kewenangan BPKP untuk menghitung atau mengaudit kerugian keuangan negara tetap ada. Adapun kewenangan BPKP yang tidak diperbolehkan adalah men-declare atau menyatakan adanya kerugian keuangan negara. Hal tersebut sesuai dengan beberapa putusan badan peradilan, baik putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi, putusan Pengadilan Tindak Pidana Korupsi maupun putusan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara.With the enactment of Supreme Court Letter Number 4 Year 2016 who said that the authorized agency in declaring the state financial losses is BPK (Financial Examiners Board), Authorization of BPKP (Financial and Developmen Monitoring Agency) in auditing/counting state financial losses still exist. This is in accordance with some of court decisions such as constitutional court and both criminal court and administrative court.
MODEL PENYELESAIAN PERSELISIHAN PARTAI POLITIK SECARA INTERNAL MAUPUN EKSTERNAL Tri Cahya Indra Permana
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 5, No 1 (2016)
Publisher : Puslitbang Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.5.1.2016.35-52

Abstract

Political parties act stipulates that a political party dispute resolved internally by the Mahkamah Partai or other designation of that and externally resolved by the District Court and the Supreme Court. The dispute substance in Mahkamah Partai which is final and binding is about organization dispute, the other can be settled in District Court and the Supreme Court. In practice, that arrangement makes the decision apart from the sense of justice, legal certainty and utility. Therefore, these rules should be revised so that the regulation of PAW, violations of the rights of members of political parties, abuse of authority, financial liability, or an objection to the decision of political parties (including the decision not to decide on something) is final and binding through Mahkamah Partai decision. While the organization disputes can be submitted to the Constitutional Court for legal action.Keywords : political party dispute, Mahkamah Partai, Supreme Court,Constitutional Court
DINAMIKA SIKAP PTUN TERHADAP SENGKETA PEMILIHAN KEPALA DAERAH / THE DYNAMICS OF ADMINISTRATIVE COURT POSITION AGAINST REGIONAL ELECTION DISPUTE Tri Cahya Indra Permana
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 7, No 2 (2018)
Publisher : Puslitbang Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.7.2.2018.175-194

Abstract

Pada masa sebelum diundangkannya Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 juncto Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2015, sikap PTUN terhadap sengketa Pilkada sangat beragam mulai dari tidak lolos dismisal, lolos dismissal tetapi ditolak atau dinyatakan tidak diterima (N.O.) oleh Majelis Hakim, bahkan ada yang gugatan dikabulkan. Setelah diundangkannya Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 junctis Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2015 dan Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 2016, sikap PTUN hanya 1 (satu) dan sangat tegas yaitu menyatakan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara secara absolut tidak berwenang memeriksa, memutus dan menyelesaikan sengketa Pilkada. Dinamika dan perubahan sikap PTUN tersebut dikarenakan adanya perubahan keadaan hukum dan maksud-maksud lain, yaitu PTUN ingin memaksimalkan lembaga-lembaga yang nyata-nyata diberi wewenang untuk menyelesaikan sengketa pada setiap tahap mulai dari sengketa administrasi sampai dengan sengketa hasil, menghindari disparitas putusan PTUN dengan putusan MK, membangun budaya hukum masyarakat yang siap menang dan siap kalah, serta menghindari sengketa yang berkepanjangan yang menghabiskan banyak tenaga, waktu, dan biaya.In the days before the Law number 1 of 2015 in conjunction with Law number 8 of 2015 issued, the position of Administrative Court against dispute of regional election is varied, among other things: failed dismissal process, not accepted, rejected and even granted. So, after Law number 1 of 2015 in conjunction with Law number 8 of 2015 and Law number 10 of 2016 issued, there is only one administrative court position which is very firm stated that administrative court is absolutely not authorized judging the dispute of regional election. A change of administrative court position was due to the changes in legal circumstances and other aims among other things: administrative court want to maximize the institutions that given authority to resolve dispute of regional election, avoid disparity of decisions between administrative court decisions and constitutional court decisions, build culture the laws of society that ready to win and ready to lost also avoid prolonged dispute that consumes a lot of energy, time and costs.
Co-Authors