Article Sidebar

Download
PDF

Main Article Content

Abstract

The authority of the Acting Regional Head in carrying out the mutation of the State Civil Apparatus (ASN) has caused legal debate due to the difference in regulation between Government Regulation Number 49 of 2008 and the Circular Letter of the Minister of Home Affairs Number 821/5492/SJ. This study aims to analyze the conflict of norms between the two legal instruments and examine the legal implications of the use of discretion by Acting Regional Heads on governance. This study uses a normative juridical method with a legislative approach and a conceptual approach. The legal materials used consist of laws and regulations, legal literature, and relevant research results. The results of the study show that the Circular Letter of the Minister of Home Affairs Number 821/5492/SJ is not in line with the principles of legality and hierarchy of laws and regulations because it provides room for ASN mutation without the mechanism of written approval of the Minister of Home Affairs as stipulated in Government Regulation Number 49 of 2008. This condition has the potential to cause abuse of power, weaken the application of general principles of good governance, and increase the risk of bureaucratic politicization during the transition period of regional leadership. This study concludes that there is a need for more stringent regulatory harmonization and restrictions on the use of discretion by Acting Regional Heads to ensure legal certainty, maintain the neutrality of ASN, and realize good governance.

Keywords

Discretion Acting Regional Head Abuse of Power Employee Transfer Legality

Article Details

References

  1. Agustina, S. (2015). Implementasi Asas Lex Specialis Derogat Legi Generali Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Masalah-Masalah Hukum, 44(4), 503. https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.44.4.2015.503-510
  2. Alissa, E., Bafadhal, F., & Amir, D. (2023). Perlindungan Konsumen Terhadap Produk Makanan Kemasan Usaha Mikro, Kecil, dan Menengah (UMKM) Yang Tidak Bersertifikasi Halal di Kota Jambi. Jurnal Ilmiah Universitas Batanghari Jambi, 23(3), 2980–2986.
  3. Amin, R. I., & Achmad. (2020). Mengurai Permasalahan Peraturan Perundang - Undangan di Indonesia. Res Publica, 4(2), 205–220.
  4. Benz, A. (2022). Federal democracy, distributive justice and the future of Europe. European Law Journal, 28(1–3). https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12390
  5. Firman, F. (2017). Meritokrasi Dan Netralitas Aparatur Sipil Negara (Asn) Dalam Pengaruh Pilkada Langsung. The Indonesian Journal of Public Administration (IJPA), 3(2), 88–105. https://doi.org/10.52447/ijpa.v3i2.1136
  6. Garifullin, M. (2024). On the question of legal regulation of administrative procedures on the example of foreign countries. Visegrad Journal on Human Rights, 6. https://doi.org/10.61345/1339-7915.2023.6.3
  7. Habibani, R. A., Frinaldi, A., & Roberia. (2024). Penerapan Prinsip Legalitas Dalam Kebijakan Administrasi Publik. Gudang Jurnal Multidisiplin Ilmu, 2(12), 296–303. https://doi.org/10.59435/gjmi.v2i12.751
  8. Hanum, C. (2020). Analisis Yuridis Kedudukan Surat Edaran Dalam Sistem Hukum Indonesia. Hukum Dan Masyarakat Madani, 10(2), 138–153. https://doi.org/10.26623/humani.v10i2.2401
  9. Hidayati, R. N. (2012). Mutasi Aparatur Pemerintah dan Kepentingan Politik: Studi Kaasus Kabupaten Gresik Dua Tahun Kepemimpinan Sambari-Qosim. Jurnal Politik Muda, 2(1), 186–193.
  10. I Ketut Sukawati Lanang Putra Perbawa, F. U. N. (2022). Tantangan Reformasi Birokrasi dalam Mewujudkan Good Governance berbasis Partisipasi Masyarakat. Discretie: Jurnal Bagian Hukum Administrasi Negara, 3(3), 170–181. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.20961/jd.v3i3.90765
  11. Khathryna Ihcent Pelealu. (2015). Konsep Pemikiran Tentang Negara Hukum Demokrasi Dan Hukum Hak Asasi Manusia Pasca Reformasi. Lex Administratum, 3(7), 106–115.
  12. Langkay, J. G., Mawuntu, R. J., & Pinasang, D. R. (2023). Kajian Hukum Pelampauan Batas Kewenangan Pejabat Administrasi yang Bertentangan dengan Asas-Asas Umum Pemerintahan yang Baik Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan. Lex Administratum, XI(4).
  13. Luhukay, R. S. (2024). Netralitas Aparatur Sipil Negara Dalam Perspektif Hak Asasi Manusia. Juris Humanity: Jurnal Riset Dan Kajian Hukum Hak Asasi Manusia, 3(1), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.37631/jrkhm.v3i1.37
  14. Manalu, J. V., & Firdausy, A. G. (2018). Analisis terhadap Pengawasan Kewenangan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) oleh Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Republik Indonesia (DPR RI) sebagai Perwujudan Prinsip Checks and Balances. Res Publica, 2(2), 133–159. https://digilib.uns.ac.id/dokumen/detail/60050/
  15. Mazepus, H., & Toshkov, D. (2022). Standing up for Democracy? Explaining Citizens’ Support for Democratic Checks and Balances. Comparative Political Studies, 55(8). https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140211060285
  16. Meutia, I. F. (2017). Reformasi Administrasi Publik. In Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan (Vol. 7, Issue 2). CV. Anugrah Utama Raharja. http://repository.lppm.unila.ac.id/24376/1/REFORMASI ADMINISTRASI PUBLIK.pdf
  17. Neves, J. A., Vasconcelos, F. D. A. G. D., Machado, M. L., Recine, E., Garcia, G. S., & Medeiros, M. A. T. D. (2022). The Brazilian Cash Transfer program (Bolsa Família): a Tool for Reducing Inequalities and Achieving Social Rights in Brazil. Global Public Health, 17(1), 26–42.
  18. Nur, S., & Susanto, H. (2020). Metode Perolehan Dan Batas-Batas Wewenang Pemerintahan. Online Administrative Law & Governance Journal, 3(3), 2621–2781.
  19. Pratama, A. B. (2021). Mengukur Imunitas Pejabat Pelaksana Perppu 1/2020 Dengan Asas Equality Before The Law. Supremasi Hukum, 17, 1–11.
  20. Pratama, A. B. (2024). Inkonsistensi Norma Penempatan Tentara Nasional Indonesia Sebagai Penjabat Kepala Daerah Pada Masa Transisi atau pensiun dari dinas ketentaraan . Doktrin: Jurnal Dunia Ilmu Hukum Dan Politik, 2(1), 117–128. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.59581/doktrin.v2i1.1884
  21. Pratama, A. B., Imaduddin, A., & Asyria, T. (2025). Legal Analysis Of The Appointment Of Acting Officials To Fill Vacancies In Democratic Regional Leadership Positions. Jurnal Tapis : Teropong Aspirasi Politik Islam, 21(1), 117–161. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24042/tps.v21i1.26235
  22. Puspita, N. Y., & Sembiring, F. (2024). Kewenangan Hukum Bpbd Dalam Penanggulangan Bencana Di Jakarta. Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan, 9(2), 232–256. https://doi.org/10.25170/paradigma.v9i2.5841
  23. Sadiawati, D., Dirkareshza, R., Setiadi, W., & ... (2023). KEWENANGAN KEPALA OTORITA DALAM PENYUSUNAN PERENCANAAN PEMBANGUNAN IBU KOTA NEGARA NUSANTARA. In … Penelitian Hukum De …. core.ac.uk.
  24. Santika, W., Ricard Zeldi Putra, L., Supriyanto, H., & Hiday Nur, A. (2023). Tinjauan Hukum Batasan Kewenangan Pejabat Bupati Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 23 Tahun 2014 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah. Sultra Law Review, 05(2), 2887–2893. https://jurnal-unsultra.ac.id/index.php/sulrev
  25. Sobirin Malian. (2020). Penyalahgunaan Wewenang Jabatan Oleh Pejabat Negara/Pemerintah : Perspektif Hukum Administrasi Negara Dan Hukum Pidana. Jurnal Hukum Respublica, 20(1), 102–121. https://doi.org/10.31849/respublica.v20i1.5363
  26. Syuhudi, I. (2018). Implementasi Asas-Asas Umum Pemerintahan Yang Baik di Lingkungan Peradilan Administrasi Negara. Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi Dan Kajian Hukum, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.31941/pj.v17i1.580
  27. Tafel, L., Ott, E., Brillinger, M., Schulze, C., & Schröter, B. (2022). Attitudes of administrative decision-makers towards nature-based solutions for flood risk management in Germany. Sustainability Science, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-021-01072-0
  28. Warjiyati, S. (2018). Tinjauan Hukum Islam Terhadap Penerapan Good Governance Dalam Pelayanan Publik. Hukum Islam, 18(1), 119. https://doi.org/10.24014/hi.v18i1.5429
  29. Zamroni, M. (2024). Konsep Kewenangan Dalam Perspektif Hukum Perdata. Jurnal Mimbar Hukum, 36(02), 495–518.
  30. Zulfikar Putra, Darmawan Wiridin, & Slamet Hariyadi. (2023). Telaah Kritis Penyalahgunaan Wewenang Jabatan (Abuse of Power) dalam Perspektif UU Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 JO UU Nomor 20 Tahun 2001. Jurnal Interpretasi Hukum, 4(3), 663–671. https://doi.org/10.22225/juinhum.4.3.7507.663-671