A Comparison of Administrative Court and Ombudsman in Supervising Government Action in IndonesiaA Comparison of Administrative Court and Ombudsman in Supervising Government Action in IndonesiaAA12162559 インドネシアにおける行政裁判所とオンブズマンによる政府の行為の監督の比較
148 , 2017-03-28 , 金沢大学大学院人間社会環境研究科 = Graduate School of Human and Socio-Enviromental Studies Kanazawa University
This study aims to compare two institutions that have the same role: to supervise government action in Indonesia. Using the comparative and statutory approach, I will describe characteristics of the Administrative Court and Ombudsman. Based on Act Number 5 of 1986 and its amendments on the Administrative Court, and Act Number 37 of 2008 on the Ombudsman, both the Administrative Court and Ombudsman oversee government action for its maladministration, and remind government officials of the rule of law and protect the rights of the citizens. The study found several differences between the two institutions. First, the authority of the Ombudsman in the settlement of maladministration is broader than that of the Administrative Court. Second, the Ombudsman is also more active in resolving complaints from the public and can conduct investigations actively and independently; whereas, the Administrative Court is held only when a plaintiff brings a lawsuit. Third, the settlement of maladministration by Ombudsman is done via a dispute resolution mechanism that is simple, fast, and free of charge. Fourth, the parties can choose from several options for resolution provided by the Ombudsman. Fifth, the Ombudsman can make recommendations regarding the settlement of maladministration, including the recommendation to pay compensation and/or rehabilitation for the injured party. Besides, for public interest, the Ombudsman can also announce the findings, conclusions, and recommendations. However, the Administrative Court can declare that a certain ruling by the administrative agency is void, with or without a claim for compensation and/or rehabilitation.