The Contest of Judicial Rationality: An Examination of Judges' Considerations in PTUN Cases No. 21/G/2022/PTUN.GTO and 19/B/2023/PT.TUN.MDO

Andris E. Bahutala; Ahmad Ahmad

doi:10.56591/dlj.v1i1.2953

The Contest of Judicial Rationality: An Examination of Judges' Considerations in PTUN Cases No. 21/G/2022/PTUN.GTO and 19/B/2023/PT.TUN.MDO

Andris E. Bahutala, Ahmad Ahmad

Abstract

This study examines the contestation of judicial rationality in the resolution of civil servant (ASN) disciplinary disputes at two levels of administrative court, namely the Gorontalo Administrative Court (PTUN Gorontalo) and the Manado Administrative Court (PT.TUN Manado), focusing on cases No. 21/G/2022/PTUN.GTO and No. 19/B/2023/PT.TUN.MDO. Using a juridical-normative approach and case analysis, the study highlights the fundamental differences in the reasoning of first-instance judges, who emphasize adherence to formal procedures and the protection of individual ASN rights, compared to the approach of appellate judges, who prioritize substantive justice, public utility, and proportionality of sanctions to maintain bureaucratic integrity. The findings indicate that judicial interpretation of administrative law is strongly influenced by the concrete context of the case, the judges' backgrounds, and their orientation towards justice, leading to disparities in decisions that result in legal uncertainty and inadequate protection for ASNs. The study concludes that standardizing judicial reasoning through technical guidelines that integrate procedural and substantive justice principles is necessary, alongside strengthening the training and mentoring of judges to ensure consistent, fair decisions that are focused on improving bureaucratic governance. Recommendations are made to promote the establishment of a national database of ASN disciplinary decisions, cross-agency collaboration, and regular regulatory evaluations to make the administrative justice system more accountable and responsive to individual rights and public interests.

Keywords

Judicial Rationality; Civil Service Discipline; Administrative Court

Full Text:

PDF

References

Ali, Safitri. 2025. “Juridical Analysis of the Position of PTUN in Resolving State Administrative Disputes.” Estudiante Law Journal 7 (2): 317–30. https://doi.org/10.33756/eslaj.v7i2.31026.

Armiati, dan Latifah Amir, Ratih. 2020. “Analisis Yuridis Pertimbangan Hakim Atas Gugatan Lewat Waktu Dalam Putusan Hakim Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Jambi Nomor 5/G/2017/PTUN.JBI.” Mendapo: Journal of Administrative Law 1 (1): 37–48. https://doi.org/10.22437/mendapo.v1i1.10989.

Atikah, Ika. 2022. Metode Penelitian Hukum. http://repository.uinbanten.ac.id/9155/1/P%20Metode%20Penelitian%20Hukum.pdf.

Azhar, Ikhsan. 2025. “Keberadaan Pihak Ketiga Wujud Keadilan Hukum Dalam Perkara Keputusan Tata Usaha Negara.” Jurnal Yudisial 14 (3): 245–62. https://doi.org/10.29123/jy.v14i3.494.

Dani, Umar. 2018. “Memahami Kedudukan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Di Indonesia: Sistem Unity of Jurisdiction Atau Duality of Jurisdiction?” Jurnal Hukum Dan Peradilan 7 (3): 405–24.

Deseano, dan Moh Imam Gusthomi, Aurick Adien, Najwa Hanif Artfian Arrasyid Aulia Putra. 2025. “Administrative Court as Bureaucratic Reform Catalyst through Administrative Law Enforcement.” Reformasi Hukum 29 (1): 111–23. https://doi.org/10.46257/jrh.v29i1.1075.

Fadillah Putra, Naufal. 2024. “Judicial Activism: Between Protecting Constitutional Supremacy or Transitioning to Juristocracy.” Jurnal Konstitusi 21 (3): 429–58. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk2127.

Fikri Alan, dan Fenolia Intan Saputri, Muhammad. 2023. “Mendesain Putusan Hakim Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Tentang Opened Legal Policy: Suatu Upaya Mewujudkan Integritas Peradilan.” Judex Laguens 1 (1): 57–80. https://doi.org/10.25216/laguens.112023.57-80.

Fiqri, Ahlul. 2023. “Paradigm for the Application of the Dominus Litis Principle in the Indonesian State Administrative Court.” JUSTICES: Journal of Law 2 (4): 202–12. https://doi.org/10.33456/justices.v2i4.2189.

Hamzah, dan Siti Nurhayati, Andi. 2024. “Analisis Legal Reasoning Dan Dampak Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Dalam Kontestasi Politik.” Fundamental: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum 13 (1): 135–53. https://doi.org/10.46257/fundamental.v13i1.4433.

HUTAGAOL, BR, and MANALSAL DEBORA. 2024. Tinjauan Yuridis Terhadap Pelaksanaan Putusan Sengketa Kepegawaian Di Pengadilan Tinggi Tata Usaha Negara Medan Sebagai Tingkat Pertama. https://repository.uhn.ac.id/handle/123456789/10702.

Jamaluddin, Achmad. 2018. “Ratio Decidendi Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Terhadap Perkara Serupa Dengan Objek Sengketa Berbeda.” Bureaucracy 5 (1): 72–89. https://doi.org/10.53363/bureau.v5i1.288.

Latupulhayat. 2025. “Dissenting Opinion Dan Asas Legalitas Dalam Pemberhentian Anggota Polri: Studi Kasus Putusan PTUN Nomor 12/G/2021/PTUN.GTO.” Demokrasi 2 (3): 72–87. https://doi.org/10.32509/demokrasi.v2i3.1011.

Maulina Roma Yanti Nainggolan, et al. 2024. “Negara Hukum, Sumber Hukum, Eksistensi, Kedudukan Dan Susunan Pengadilan Tata Usaha.” Jurnal Sahabat ISNU SU 1 (2): 123–28.

Muhammad Rayhan, dan Nurikah Nurikah, HE Rakhmat Jazuli. 2023. “Penyelesaian Sengketa Tata Usaha Negara: Obyek Sengketa Negatif Dan Penerapan Asas-Asas Umum Pemerintahan Yang Baik.” Yustisia Tirtayasa: Jurnal Tugas Akhir 3 (3): 342–60.

Mustapa, Iqbal, Zamroni Abdussamad, and Mellisa Towadi. 2022. “Positive Fictional Authority Legislative Ratio in Government Administration Laws and Job Creation Laws.” Damhil Law Journal 2 (1): 1. https://doi.org/10.56591/dlj.v1i1.1726.

Mustapa, Muhammad Iqbal, Zamroni Abdussamad, and Mellisa Towadi. n.d. Rasiolegis Kewenangan Mengadili Perkara Fiktif Positif Dalam Perundang-Undangan. 1st ed. UII Press. Accessed December 19, 2024. https://dpsd.uii.ac.id/uii-press/katalog/rasiolegis-kewenangan-mengadili-perkara-fiktif-positif-dalam-perundang-undangan/.

Okprianti, et al., Reny. 2024. “Tindakan Yuridis Dalam Putusan Nomor 59/G/2021/PTUN.MDN: Analisis Penyelesaian Sengketa Tata Usaha Negara.” Collegium Studiosum Journal 7 (2): 464–71. https://doi.org/10.56301/csj.v7i2.1397.

Payoh, dan Arman Tjoneng, Karensia. 2024. “Tinjauan Yuridis Terhadap Gugatan Mantan Ketua Mahkamah Konstitusi Di PTUN Jakarta Atas Pemulihan Jabatan.” Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis 5 (8): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.56370/jhlg.v1i3.258.

Shodiqin, Ahmad. 2023. “Pursue The Position Of The State Administrative Court In Indonesia.” JUSTICES: Journal of Law 2 (2): 113–21. https://doi.org/10.33456/justices.v2i2.1075.

Sutrisno, Hadi. 2022. “Discourse of Electronic Judiciary Regarding Execution of Court Decisions in the Administrative Judiciary Body.” Jurnal Hukum Peratun 5 (1): 19–38. https://doi.org/10.25216/peratun.512022.19-38.

Triono, Agus, and Kasmawati Kasmawati. 2025. “Diskresi Pejabat Administrasi Dalam Pelayanan Publik Terhadap Batasan Dan Pengawasan Diskresi.” Lex Stricta: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 4 (1): 33–42.

Yahya, Isman dan. 2022. “Istiqra’ al-Ma’nāwī: A Multicultural Judicial Reasoning.” Ijtihad: Jurnal Wacana Hukum Islam Dan Kemanusiaan 22 (1): 95–116. https://doi.org/10.18326/ijtihad.v22i1.95-116.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.56591/dlj.v1i1.2953