Ambiguity in APIP Supervisory Findings and the Limits of Administrative Court Jurisdiction in Indonesia

Awaludin Nur Ihfan; Shinta Hadiyantina; Riana Susmayanti

doi:10.26623/jic.v11i2.13807

Authors

Awaludin Nur Ihfan Brawijaya University
Shinta Hadiyantina Brawijaya University
Riana Susmayanti Brawijaya University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v11i2.13807

Keywords:

Administrative Court; , APIP Supervision Results;, Authority, Examining of Elements of Abuse of Authority, Legal Certainty

Abstract

This study examines the ambiguity of the phrase “APIP Supervision Results” in Article 2(2) of Supreme Court Regulation No. 4 of 2015, which has led to inconsistent judicial interpretations and legal uncertainty regarding the jurisdiction of the Administrative Court in reviewing alleged abuse of authority. While existing studies primarily address the general relationship between administrative courts and supervisory mechanisms, they have not sufficiently analyzed the plurality of APIP supervisory regimes and their implications for jurisdictional limits. Employing normative legal research with statutory, case, conceptual, and philosophical approaches, this study analyzes regulatory frameworks and divergent court decisions to identify interpretative inconsistencies. The findings reveal that APIP supervision operates within a pluralistic and fragmented regulatory structure, encompassing multiple forms beyond regular and specific-purpose supervision, thereby rendering a purely formal interpretation inadequate. This study argues that limiting the meaning of “APIP Supervision Results” to specific supervisory typologies undermines legal certainty and restricts access to judicial protection. Accordingly, it proposes a shift toward a substantive interpretative approach based on normative criteria capable of accommodating diverse supervisory practices. The novelty of this research lies in its systematic reconstruction of the concept of APIP supervision results through a substantive-normative framework that integrates the plurality of supervisory regimes with theories of authority and legal certainty. Its contribution is to provide a doctrinal basis for clarifying the limits of administrative judicial authority and to offer practical guidance for achieving consistency in judicial interpretation, thereby strengthening legal certainty and administrative justice in Indonesia.

References

Adiguna, Leonardo. “The Prosecutor’s Authority to Conduct a Criminal Investigation Based on The Government Administration Law.” Administrative and Environmental Law Review 2, no. 1 (2021): 11–20. https://doi.org/10.25041/aelr.v2i1.2214.

Anggoro, Firna Novi. “Abuse Of Authority By Civil Servants (Ratio Legis Article 36 of Government Regulation Number 94 of 2021 Concerning Civil Servant Discipline).” Rechtsvinding 11, no. 2 (2022): 211–28. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v11i2.936.

Aris Setyo Nugroho, Danang Catur Wahyu Wijayanto, Arie Purnomosidi. “Menguji Asas Ius Curia Novit, Ruang Lingkup Dan Batasan.” Jurnal Cakrawala Ilmiah 3, no. 6 (2024): 2125–34.

Atmaja, Aditya Yuli Sulistyawan dan Aldio Fahrezi Permana. “Arti Penting Legal Reasoning Hakim Dalam Pengambilan Putusan Perkara Di Pengadilan Untuk Menghindari ‘Onvoldoende Gemotiveerd.’” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 6, no. 2 (2021): 482–96. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v6i2.4232.

Ayu, Dyah, and Vijaya Laksmi. “Study of Authority from a Civil Law Perspective.” Sinomics Journal 4, no. 2 (2025): 259–68. https://doi.org/10.54443/sj.v4i2.497.

Cahyandari, Dewi, and Shinta Hadiyantina. “Model Sosialisasi Pengujian Penyalahgunaan Wewenang Dalam Mewujudkan Good Governance Di Kota Malang.” Jurnal Supremasi 12, no. 1 (2022): 59–72. https://doi.org/10.35457/supremasi.v12i1.1756.

Cinta Annata Nurhan, Rizky Sri Hapsari, Rr. Luh Sekar Nur Sukmawati, Ahmad Fadhil Haidar, Roderick Natanael, Muhammad Pradana Putra. “Relevansi Fungsi Penafsiran Gramatikal Dalam Memahami Hukum.” Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Sosial, Dan Humaniora 2, no. 9 (2024): 273–78.

Endang, M. Ikbar Andi. “Law Ratio and Law Implication Examination of Authority Abuse According To Law of State Administration.” Jurnal Hukum Peratun 3, no. 1 (2021): 71–96. https://doi.org/10.25216/peratun.312020.71-96.

Hamidi, Jazim. Hermeneutika Hukum: Sejarah, Filsafat, & Metode Tafsir. Malang: UB Press, 2011.

Helga Nurmila, Moh. Bagus, Sri Warjiyati. “Polemik Pemberlakuan UU No. 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan dalam Antologi Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Hukum Tata Usaha Negara.” Sosio Yustisia: Jurnal Hukum Dan Perubahan Sosial, 1, no. 2 (2021): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.15642/sosyus.v1i2.108.

Hidayat, Nur, and Desi Apriani. “Koherensi Sistem Hukum Pancasila Dengan Metode Penalaran Ideologi Pancasila.” Negara Hukum: Membangun Hukum Untuk Keadilan Dan Kesejahteraan 12, no. 1 (2021): 143–60. https://doi.org/10.22212/jnh.v12i1.1985.

Ihfan, Awaludin Nur. “Problematika Kewenangan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Dalam Pengujian Unsur Penyalahgunaan Wewenang.” Media Iuris 7, no. 1 (2024): 69–100. https://doi.org/10.20473/mi.v7i1.44793.

Julman Hente. “Kewenangan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Dalam Menguji Unsur Penyalahgunaan Wewenang Pejabat Negara.” Jurnal Tana Mana 4, no. 3 (2024): 430–40. https://doi.org/10.33648/jtm.v5i3.509.

Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Prenada Media, 2005.

———. Pengantar Ilmu Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana, 2021.

Mertokusumo, Sudikno. Penemuan Hukum Sebuah Pengantar. Yogjakarta: Maha Karya Pustaka, 2020.

Nalle, Victor Imanuel W. Konsep Uji Materiil. Malang: Setara Press, 2013.

Otto, Jan Michiel. Kepastian Hukum Di Negara Berkembang. Jakarta: Komisi Hukum Nasional Republik Indonesia, 2003.

Permana, Kurniawan, and Chindy Chresna Agung Bujana. “Examining the Efforts of Government Internal Supervisory Apparatus (APIP) in Enhancing Bureaucratic Reform, Organizational Integrity, and Risk Management: An Efficiency Analysis.” Integritas : Jurnal Antikorupsi 10, no. 1 (2024): 107–22. https://doi.org/10.32697/integritas.v10i1.1144.

Putrijanti, Aju. “The Competence of the Administrative Court and Administrative Justice.” Fiat Justisia: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 14, no. 2 (2020): 97–112. https://doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v14no2.1890.

Putrijanti, Aju, and Lapon Tukan Leonard. “The Competence of Administrative Court To Examine the Abuse of Power.” Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum Dan Keadilan 7, no. 1 (2019): 107–27. https://doi.org/10.29303/ius.v7i1.605.

Riqiey, Baharuddin, and Muhammad Ahsanul Huda. “Interpreting Article 22(2) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Post Constitutional Court Decision 54/PUU-XXI/2023.” Ikatan Penulis Mahasiswa Hukum Indonesia Law Journal 4, no. 1 (2024): 24–37. https://doi.org/10.15294/ipmhi.v4i1.76687.

Setyawan, Bambang. “The Existence of Public Information Commission Related to Public Information Disclosure Principles in Improving Public Services.” Yuridika 36, no. 3 (2021): 545–48. https://doi.org/10.20473/ydk.v36i3.30382.

Siahaan, Putri Nurmala Sari. “Elements Testings Distortion of the Abuse of Authority Based on the Government Administration Law and Corruption Crime.” Corruptio 2, no. 1 (2021): 45–60. https://doi.org/10.25041/corruptio.v2i1.2246.

Sri Nurhari Susanto. “Komponen, Konsep Dan Pendekatan Hukum Administrasi Negara.” Administrative Law & Governance Journal. 4, no. 1 (2021): 144–57. https://doi.org/10.14710/alj.v4i1.144%20-%20157.

Susanto, Sri Nurhari. “Metode Perolehan Dan Batas-Batas Wewenang Pemerintahan.” Administrative Law & Governance Journal 3, no. 3 (2020): 430–41. https://doi.org/10.14710/alj.v3i3.430%20%20-%20%20441.

Susmayanti, Riana. “Konsep Tanggung Jawab Sosial Dalam Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia.” Arena Hukum 7, no. 3 (2014): 303–471.

Syam, Fauzi, Sukamto Satoto, and Helmi Helmi. “Politik Hukum Pemberian Kompetensi Absolut Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara Dalam Pengujian Penyalahgunaan Wewenang.” Undang: Jurnal Hukum 6, no. 1 (2023): 189–233. https://doi.org/10.22437/ujh.6.1.189-233.

Triwanto, and Esti Aryani. “The Urgency of Granting Authority to Assess Corruption Justice Collaborators.” Bestuur 8, no. 1 (2020): 60–69. https://doi.org/10.20961/bestuur.v8i1.42720.

Widiarto, Fathorrahman Fathor and Aan Eko. “Rethinking ‘Res Judicata Pro Varitate Habetur’ in Indonesian Judiciary.” Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review 19, no. 1 (2924): 7. https://doi.org/10.21070/ijler.v19i1.995.