Judicial Review of Policy Regulations: A Comparative Study of Judicial Review in Indonesia and Netherlands

Abstract

This research aims to describe and compare the concept of judicial review of policy regulations in Indonesia and the Netherlands. The research method used in this study is normative research with literature studies using books, articles, and relevant references. The results show that there is no explicit and detailed regulation or norm regarding the concept of testing policy regulations in government administrative law. This is in contrast to the Netherlands, which explicitly and in detail regulates the concept of testing policy regulations in Algemene Wet Bestuursrecht (Dutch Government Administration Law). The unregulated concept of policy regulation reviews in Indonesia has led to inconsistencies in the review of policy regulations. For example, the Supreme Court (MA) received six requests to review policy regulations, four of which were accepted and two of which were rejected. This can have implications for uncertainty in guaranteeing the rights of aggrieved parties in the implementation of policy regulations so that it is necessary to formalize policy regulations in the Government Administration Law in the future so that the scope of discretion in the Government Administration Law does not only include State Administrative Decisions and Government Administration Actions, but also includes the concept and procedures for testing policy regulations.