In some incidents of pollution or destruction, the victims of pollution or destruction can be very numerous. Therefore, if the victim community takes legal action individually, or if the victim of the pollution sues individually, the process will be very long and expensive, which will make the process quick, easy and inexpensive (constant justice), as stated in Article No. 5, paragraph (2) of the Law on the Judiciary, will not be carried out The Environmental Management Act No. 32 of 2009 is a legal product in Indonesia, Communities that have been victims of pollution have filed a class action lawsuit, which has been jointly represented by a small group of people called group representatives. The existence of the Environmental Protection and Management Act No. 32 of 2009, the Forestry Act No. 41 of 1999, the Forestry Act No. 41 of 1999, the Forestry Act No. 41 of 1999. 8 of 1999 on consumer protection, in fact introduced an open class action as a solution to this problem; And there are still many laws relating to class actions such as Law No.
24 of 1992 on Land Planning, Law No. 27 of 2003 on Geothermal Energy, Law No. 7 of 2004 on Water Resources, Law No. 31 of 2004 on Fisheries, all of which are basically guidelines for formulating the terms class action and standing to bring proceedings, which are commonly used in judicial practice in Western countries. especially in the Anglo-Saxon states of America, which generally adhere to the common law system, where this system is strongly oriented towards the creation of legal rules by judicial decisions. Then, there are 2 (two) conditions for filing this class action, which can be divided into substantive and formal requirements, namely as follows: A class action is the second time that a legal and judicial center has been involved in this class action research; Research on the same topic was conducted in 2002 and the study also produced an academic manuscript in the form of a book, which was also distributed to the courts participating in the study. This, of course, requires careful consideration, given that after almost 7 years of entry into force of PERMA No. 1 of 2002, it turns out that there are still many differences in interpretation compared to the results of the judge`s decision on class actions, so one judgment is opposed to another judgment. This prompted the Puslitbang Kumdil of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia to deem it necessary to conduct a review by conducting a new investigation into the class action.
The development of social life and the understanding of law and society`s need for law, which ensures a balance of rights and duties for all citizens, make the existence of PERMA No. 1 of 2002, it is necessary to question its existence. Some of the judge`s respondents were of the opinion that PERMA was merely an attempt to legalize and tolerate the legal phenomenon developed in society. On the other hand, there are also those who think that PERMA 1 of 2002, in its implementation, has many different interpretations, especially among the judges themselves, so that the understanding and knowledge of judges of the creation of law and legal certainty in terms of collective redress mechanism and civil actions must be reunderstood. The public is aware of the urgency of having laws related to environmental issues, but it is undeniable that the government`s bias and concern for citizens on environmental issues is still very low. In this study, in addition to assessing the existence of PERMA No. 1 of 2002, the Centre for Law and Justice will also collect contributions and experiences as well as judges` difficulties in deciding class cases/actions in a more comprehensive and detailed manner. The Center for Law and Justice will also examine more critically in terms of legal theories, norms and goals, so that it is hoped that law and legal reform will be realized, as well as produce a scientific manuscript that regulates class actions in a more complete and comprehensive way, so that in the end new legal discoveries (legal vinding) will be found.
nor the creation of laws (Rechtsschepping). With Perma No. 1 of 2002, which is a class action lawsuit, it is expected that this will become clearer; In judicial practice, however, there are still ambiguous interpretations of the content of PERMA on the ground, including the fact that it is fatal and unclear among judges; There is therefore a gap between one judgment and another. PERMA No. 1 2002 should enable judges to consider and resolve the issue of class actions, so that the public and those seeking justice become happier and more confident in obtaining judges` decisions on their claims, regardless of the fact that the existence of PERMA No. 1 of 2002 considers that in the future, It will be necessary to review whether it will continue to be maintained as it stands. Or in the future, improvements must be made and efforts must be made to reform the law (law and legal reform). Class actions, citizen lawsuits and the right to run are sensitive issues in society, but they have always been a public discourse that has never been discussed. Because it affects both the interests of the Community and the citizens. Recently, the pros and cons of class actions have come back to the fore, calling into question the alternative solutions that must be made by the government to ensure the protection of its citizens.
This issue becomes very sensitive because it is not only related to legal issues, but also to social, economic and public health issues. The debate was unclear and far from resolved. For Indonesia itself, a citizens` trial is not a familiar or popular form of trial, although many parties have attempted to file the trial in court. As it is not known whether there is a lawsuit that enters the public courts on behalf of the public and the public interest on behalf of a citizen action, the panel will refer to Perma No. 1 of 2002 regarding the class action lawsuit. This means that the complaint filed by citizens will be evaluated whether or not it meets the requirements of Perma No. 1 of 2002. If the panel of judges uses Perma No. 1 of 2002 as a reference, it is certain that a problem will arise namely, namely that the citizen action filed will be judged as if it were a collective action, although it is known that citizen action and collective action have a different legal character, so that a filed citizen action has the potential, to be rejected or not to be accepted by the court. However, not all lawsuits of citizens filed in court are dismissed or unacceptable, because in practice, if there is a judge who gives priority to the aspect of justice and the aspect of expediency in the decision of a case, it may be that a citizen court action is brought by the court on the basis of the protection of the rights of the neglected state.
Walhi. The Kabul judge partially agrees to the citizens` trial of Kalteng residents. www.walhi.or.id/hakim-kabulkan-sebagian-gugatan-citizen-law-suit-warga-kalteng. Retrieved 1 January 2021. Izinesia.id – There are indeed many types of civil procedure lawsuits. Generally, we are only introduced in 3 (three) types of lawsuits on campus, namely (1) voluntary lawsuits or commonly referred to as solicitations, (2) litigious lawsuits, or collectively referred to as litigation lawsuits, and (3) class actions or collectively referred to as class actions. However, in the current development of Indonesian civil procedure law, there are currently 2 (two) types of actions that can be brought by the parties, namely (1) legal actions and (2) citizen actions or citizen actions. An example of a citizen-initiated lawsuit that has been upheld and has attracted public attention is a lawsuit filed by the plaintiff with PN Central Jakarta, consisting of observers, activists and parents of 58 (fifty-eight) students who were victims of the introduction of the National (UN) exam in 2006. In his complaint, the complainant stated that the United Nations was held on 16, 17 and 18 May 2006 for high schools, vocational schools, MAs and equivalent teaching units.