Authority of the Information Commission as a Quasi Judicial Institution in Resolving Public Information Disputes

Ginar Listya Faradina
{"title":"Authority of the Information Commission as a Quasi Judicial Institution in Resolving Public Information Disputes","authors":"Ginar Listya Faradina","doi":"10.15294/imrev.v2i2.68229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The right to information is a guaranteed right in laws and regulations for every citizen. The promulgation of the Public Information Disclosure Act is a new era to ensure the fulfillment of the right to information. Within the framework of carrying out public information disclosure, of course we are faced with various public information disputes, namely disputes that arise between users of public information and public bodies. Along with the increasing demands and needs of the public in the constitutional legal system, various judicial institutions have been specifically formed and specifically mandated by the state legislation through to examine and decide disputes other than those that are the domain of the existing judiciary or are referred to as quasi-judicial or quasi-judicial institutions, one of which is the Information Commission. This writing examines the authority of the Information Commission as a quasi-judicial institution in resolving public information disputes through a non-litigation process. Which emphasized that one of the mandates of the UU KIP is the establishment of an Information Commission which has the authority to resolve public information disputes in a non-litigation manner, namely in the form of mediation and non-litigation adjudication. The information commission has special powers that are absolute, absolute, and cannot be transferred or given to other institutional bodies. The two main tasks of the position of the information commission are finalizing and establishing general policies related to public information services for public bodies.","PeriodicalId":377989,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Media Law Review","volume":"140 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indonesia Media Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15294/imrev.v2i2.68229","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The right to information is a guaranteed right in laws and regulations for every citizen. The promulgation of the Public Information Disclosure Act is a new era to ensure the fulfillment of the right to information. Within the framework of carrying out public information disclosure, of course we are faced with various public information disputes, namely disputes that arise between users of public information and public bodies. Along with the increasing demands and needs of the public in the constitutional legal system, various judicial institutions have been specifically formed and specifically mandated by the state legislation through to examine and decide disputes other than those that are the domain of the existing judiciary or are referred to as quasi-judicial or quasi-judicial institutions, one of which is the Information Commission. This writing examines the authority of the Information Commission as a quasi-judicial institution in resolving public information disputes through a non-litigation process. Which emphasized that one of the mandates of the UU KIP is the establishment of an Information Commission which has the authority to resolve public information disputes in a non-litigation manner, namely in the form of mediation and non-litigation adjudication. The information commission has special powers that are absolute, absolute, and cannot be transferred or given to other institutional bodies. The two main tasks of the position of the information commission are finalizing and establishing general policies related to public information services for public bodies.
信息委员会作为准司法机构在解决公共信息纠纷中的权威
知情权是法律法规保障的每一个公民的权利。《公共信息披露法》的颁布是新时代信息权实现的保障。在进行公共信息披露的框架内,我们当然会面临各种各样的公共信息纠纷,即公共信息使用者与公共机构之间产生的纠纷。随着公众对宪法法律制度日益增长的要求和需要,国家立法专门成立了各种司法机构,并专门授权它们审查和裁决不属于现有司法机构领域或被称为准司法或准司法机构的纠纷,其中之一就是信息委员会。本文考察了信息委员会作为准司法机构在通过非诉讼程序解决公共信息纠纷方面的权威。其中强调,UU KIP的任务之一是建立一个信息委员会,该委员会有权以非诉讼方式解决公共信息纠纷,即以调解和非诉讼裁决的形式。信息委员会拥有绝对、绝对的特殊权力,不能转让或授予其他机构。新闻委员会职位的两项主要任务是最后确定和确立与公共机构的新闻服务有关的一般政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信