Extensive Jurisdiction of State Administrative Courts in Indonesia: Interpretation and Legal Coherence Issues

Prior to 2014, state administrative courts' authority was constrained due to the limited construction of administrative decisions and exclusion articles in the SAC. The GAA expanded these restrictions in 2014 by modifying those provisions. The court is empowered to review not only written administrative decisions but also unlawful factual government acts. However, the expansions give rise to multiple interpretations and legal coherence concerns. Crucial issues include jurisdictional conflicts between administrative courts and other courts, varying interpretations of legal standing requirements and legal injuries, identifying the government's factual actions as defined by the GAA, and the existence of exclusion articles in the SAC. This study uses a systematic and conceptual legal interpretation and analysis with three approaches. It concluded that the basic principles and concepts in the SAC should not be neglected when interpreting the provisions of the GAA. There are certain legal coherence issues if the interpretation of the GAA is not linked to the SAC. To solve these problems, the GAA's implementation and the extensive jurisdiction of the administrative judiciary require the integration and reformulation of substantive and procedural laws and judicial institutional relations.

Automated summary

This study concludes that when interpreting the provisions of the GAA, the basic principles and concepts in the SAC should not be neglected to address legal coherence issues. Solving these problems requires the integration and reformulation of substantive and procedural laws and judicial institutional relations.