Aplikatif Gugatan Perbuatan Tidak Bertindak Pejabat Tata Usaha Negara Dalam Pengangkatan Kepala Madrasah

Abstract

Passive or unresponsive attitudes by state administrative officials toward applications submitted by citizens are not uncommon. Such passive attitudes by state administrative officials toward citizen applications constitute an omission that is detrimental to legal entities. This study analyzes the lawsuit filed by the Al-Mabrurotul Munawwaroh Foundation against the Supervisory Official of Madrasahs at the Ministry of Religious Affairs Office of Tangerang City regarding the failure to issue a recommendation for the appointment of a Madrasah Head and the failure to respond to a formal notice of default (somasi). Using a normative legal research method with a statutory and case-law approach, the primary legal materials include Law No. 5 of 1986 as amended by Law No. 51 of 2009, Law No. 30 of 2014, Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) No. 6 of 2018, and Supreme Court Circular Letter (SEMA) No. 5 of 2021. The findings affirm that omission may be classified as an object of an administrative dispute if it satisfies the elements of being concrete, individual, final, and producing legal consequences. Under SEMA No. 5 of 2021, letter c, the plaintiff is not required to exhaust administrative remedies. Article 87 of Law No. 30 of 2014 serves as the basis for filing an objection, and an official's failure to respond within ten working days carries the implication of a fictieve beschikking (deemed decision). This study recommends legal certainty regarding the authority of the Administrative Court over omission disputes following the enactment of the Job Creation Law, as well as the strengthening of administrative sanctions against negligent officials.