IMPLIKASI YURIDIS PENGATURAN KEPUTUSAN TATA USAHA NEGARA FIKTIF POSITIF DAN FIKTIF NEGATIF

Abstract

In writing this journal the author discusses about the problem of a conflict of norms between
the provisions in Article 3 UUPTUN and Article 53 UUAP relating to the regulation of
KTUN on a request whose deadline of determination is not regulated by law. Not infrequently
the KTUN established by state administrative officials because of a request from the public.
So that it may be possible not to respond (silence) of the request by authorized officials. To
create legal certainty of the application, the provisions are regulated in different laws. This
study aims to analyze the juridical implications of KTUN regulation on a request whose
deadline is not regulated by law and to know the harmonization between the provisions in
UUPTUN and UUAP regarding this issue.
This study uses normative research methods with the approach of legislation, therefore using
primary, secondary, tertiary legal materials obtained from library studies. The analysis
technique used in this research is descriptive qualitative technique.
The answers obtained by the authors in this study that with the arrangement in UUPTUN
implicating the application is rejected and in the UUAP the request is accepted considered
granted, it implies the absence of legal certainty, the extension of the meaning of KTUN, the
existence of two law of the PTUN event, the authority of PTUN, and the enactment of binding
it KTUN. harmonization of provisions in UUPTUN and UUPTUN is done by using the theory
of preference, so that which can be applied for the basis of arrangement is provision in
UUAP. Therefore, legislative refiew needed to revise the UUPTUN.