THE COMPARISON OF EVIDENCE IN STATE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT BETWEEN INDONESIA AND SOUTH KOREA

Fadli Zaini Dalimunthe(1*)

(1) Universitas Indonesia
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


The judiciary under the supreme court consists of general courts, religious courts, military courts, and state administrative courts. In each procedural law court, the provisions concerning evidence are regulated. Evidence is the stage where the parties try to convince the panel of judges about the truth of the arguments put forward in a dispute based on valid evidence. Evidence has an important role because the results of evidence can be the basis for consideration by the panel of judges in making a decision. Evidence in the procedural law of the state administrative court is not only carried out in the Indonesian state administrative court but also in the South Korean Administrative Court. The historical development and organizational structure of the South Korean Administrative Court are the basis for analyzing the Evidence in the South Korean Administrative Court. Lessons from the South Korean Administrative Court can see the similarities and differences in the concept of evidence and type of evidence used in the South Korean Administrative Court with the Indonesian State Administrative Court. The approach used in this study is the statutory approach, comparative approach, and conceptual approach.

Keywords


evidence; state administrative court; Indonesia; South Korea

Full Text:

ENGLISH

References


Abdullah, M. Ali, Teori dan Praktik Hukum Acara Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara Pasca-Amandemen, Jakarta: Kencana, 2015.

Abdullah, Rozali, Hukum Acara Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara, Jakarta: Radjawali, 1992.

Act No. 12347 of 2014 concerning Administrative Procedures, Article 1.

Act No. 12347 of 2014 concerning Administrative Procedures, Article 33.

Act No. 12347 of 2014 concerning Administrative Procedures, Article 31 Paragraph (2).

Act No. 12347 of 2014 concerning Administrative Procedures, Article 37.

Act No. 12347 of 2014 concerning Administrative Procedures, Article 31 paragraph (1) and (2).

Act No. 12347 of 2014 concerning Administrative Procedures, Article 31 paragraph (4)

Act No. 13522 of 2015 concerning Court Organization, Article 1 (Purpose).

Act No. 13522 of 2015 concerning Court Organization, Article 2 paragraph (3).

Act No. 13522 of 2015 concerning Court Organization, Article 3 (Categories of Courts).

Act No. 14103 of 2016 concerning Civil Procedure, Article 293-294.

Act No. 14103 of 2016 concerning Civil Procedure, Article 350.

Act No. 15490 of 2018 concerning Court Organization, Article 26 paragraph (4)

Act No. 15490 of 2018 concerning Court Organization, Article 40-44.

Amir, Latifah, “Pembuktian Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Tata Usaha Negara Dan Perkara Pidana”, Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Jambi, vol. 6, no. 1 (2015).

Aswanto, Aswanto, Hukum dan Kekuasaan: Relasi Hukum, Politik dan Pemilu, Yogyakarta: Rangkang Education, 2012.

Bedner, Adiaan, Administrative Courts in Indonesia, Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2001.

Cho, Kuk, Litigation in Korea, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc., 2010.

Cleary, Edward W., McCormick’s Handbook of the Law of Evidence, St. Paul Minn: West Publishing Co., 1972.

Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia 1945, Article 1 paragraph (3)

González-Quintero, Rodrigo, “Judicial review in the Republic of Korea: an introduction”, Revista de derecho: División de Ciencias Jurídicas de la Universidad del Norte, vol. 34 (2010), pp. 1-17.

Kim, Si Cheol, Introduction to the Korean Civil Procedure: An Overview, Presented on April 21, 2008.

Kusumo, Sudikno Marto, Hukum Acara Perdata Indonesia, 7th ed., Yogyakarta: Liberty, 2006.

Law No. 5 of 1986 concerning State Administrative Court State Gazette No. 77 of 1986, Article 1 number 4.

Law No. 5 of 1986 concerning State Administrative Court State Gazette No. 77 of 1986, Article 100.

Law No. 5 of 1986 concerning State Administrative Court State Gazette No. 77 of 1986, Article 107.

Lee, Eric Ilhyung, “Expert Evidence in the Republic of Korea and under the US Federal Rules of Evidence: A Comparative Study”, Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review, vol. 19, no. 3 (1997), pp. 585-632.

Lee, Hee-Jung, “The structures and roles in judicial review of administrative litigation in Korea”, Journal of Korean Law, vol. 6, no. 1 (2006), pp. 44-68.

Marbun, S.F., Peradilan Administrasi Negara dan Upaya Administrasi di Indonesia, Yogyakarta: Penerbit FH UII Press, 2011.

Marzuki, Peter Mahmud, Penelitian Hukum, Jakarta: Kencana, 2014.

Rumokoy, Nike K., “Peran P. TUN dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Tata Usaha Negara”, Jurnal Hukum Unsrat, vol. 20, no. 2 (2012), pp. 126-139.

Supreme Court of Korea, March 2019, p. 9, available: http://www.eng.scourt.go.kr/, accessed 4 April 2019.

Supreme Court of Korea, The Judiciary Administrative. https://eng.scourt.go.kr/eng/judiciary/proceedings/administrative.jsp, accessed 4 April 2019.

Teguh Samudera, Hukum Pembuktian Dalam Acara Perdata, Bandung: PT. Alumni, 2004.

Tjandra, Riawan, Teori dan Praktek Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara, Yogyakarta: Universitas Atmajaya, 2010.

Valerine, J. L. K., Metode Penelitian Hukum (Bagian I), Jakarta: Program Pasca Sarjana Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 2015.

Wantu, Fence M., Idee Des Recht: Kepastian Hukum, Keadilan, Kemanfaatan (Implementasi dalam Proses Peradilan Perdata, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2011.

Yang, Chang Soo, “The Judiciary in Contemporary Society: Korea”, Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, vol. 25, no. 2 (1993), pp. 303-313.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.25216/jhp.9.2.2020.232-254

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Abstracting and Indexing by: