Kepastian Hukum Terhadap Pelaksanaan Putusan Perkara (PHI) Perselisihan Hubungan Industrial Pada Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru Berdasarkan Undang-Undang No. 2 Tahun 2004 Tentang Penyelesaian Perselisihan Hubungan Industrial

Saputri, Thasa Indah (2022) Kepastian Hukum Terhadap Pelaksanaan Putusan Perkara (PHI) Perselisihan Hubungan Industrial Pada Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru Berdasarkan Undang-Undang No. 2 Tahun 2004 Tentang Penyelesaian Perselisihan Hubungan Industrial. Other thesis, Universitas Islam Riau.

Text 181010421.pdf - Submitted Version Download (6MB)

Abstract

In civil cases, the execution of a judge's decision is carried out by clerks and bailiffs under the supervision of the district court's head. According to Article 36 paragraph 3 of Law No. 4 of 2004, as well as Article 197 paragraph 2 HIR/Article 209 paragraph 1 RBg, implementation of a decision is a subsequent action taken by the winning party filing an application requesting that the losing party implement or carry out the decision's contents. Based on the above background, problems emerge, including the following: 1) how is the legal certainty for the implementation of IRC decisions with permanent legal force; and 2) What are the impediments to implementing IRC decisions with permanent legal force, According to the type, this study falls under the category of socio-legal research, which is research conducted directly in the field. Meanwhile, the nature of this research indicates that it is descriptive-analytical. The findings of this study indicate that legal certainty regarding the implementation of a decision with permanent legal force refers to one of the IRC cases examined by the author, namely Decision Number 34/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2016/PN.Pbr jo Number 220 K/Pdt.Sus-PHI /2017, since the defeated party has not yet voluntarily carried out the decision's contents, despite the request for execution submitted by Decision Number 34/Pdt.Sus-PHI in conjunction with Number 220 K/Pdt.Sus-PHI /2017, but it has not been implemented until now. Thus, there is no legal certainty regarding the fulfillment of workers' rights in terms of severance pay, gratuities for years of service, and replacement of medical, housing, and annual leave. There is also no legal certainty or sense of justice in a situation where the winning party must take execution confiscation against the defendant of execution's movable and immovable property. Naturally, in this case, the workers encountered difficulties locating documents pertaining to the execution defendant's movable and immovable property. Obstacles to the implementation of the PHI decision with permanent legal force, namely the confiscation of execution in the execution case Number 04/Pen.PHI/Eks-Pts/2019/PN.Pbr in conjunction with the decision Number 34/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2016/PN.Pbr jo Number 220 K/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2017, have been submitted. However, the defendant for execution did not have good intention in carrying out or implementing the decision voluntarily, as he/she failed to respond to the two summonses issued by the Head of the Pekanbaru District Court. The confiscation application filed on August 12, 2019, cannot be carried out because there was insufficient initial evidence to confiscate the object requested, and the confiscation application filed on June 2, 2020 has not yet been carried out by the court even though it has been approved and there has been payment, it can be seen that there are also obstacles from the court who neglect to carry out their duties.

Actions (login required)

View Item