Analysis Of The Plaintiff's Lawsuit For The Defendant's Unlawful Act To Control The Rights To Land Owned By Another Person Which Was Rejected By The Rokan Hilir State Court (Niet Onvankelijk Verklaard) For Ne Bis In Idem Reasons Based On May Ruling N

This study aims to examine the application of the Defendant's Unlawful Acts in the Plaintiff's Land Rights Dispute Rejected by the Rokan Hilir District Court (Niet Onvankelijk Verklaard) Due to NeBis In Idem Reasons based on Supreme Court Decision Number: 4348 K/Pdt/2022 and Decision Number 42/Pdt.G/2023/PN Rhl). The type of research used is normative legal research. Discussion Results: the lawsuit dated September 22, 2023 which was received and registered at the Rokan Hilir District Court Clerk's Office on September 25, 2023 with Registration Number 42/Pdt.G/2023/PN Rhl, cannot be accepted (niet ontvankelijke verklaard) by the judge for several reasons, including: the plaintiff's lawsuit against the Defendants in the same object has occurred in the Rokan Hilir District Court with Decision Number 34/Pdt.G/2020/PN.Rhl to the Cassation level at the Supreme Court, so that in accordance with the MARI decision Number: 4348 K/Pdt/2022 dated December 13, 2022, the case has been decided and has permanent legal force. This is in accordance with the provisions of Article 1917 of the Civil Code, which reads "The power of a Judge's decision that has obtained absolute force is not broader than just regarding the matter of the decision. This means that a case that has been decided by a previous judge and has obtained permanent legal force cannot be sued again with the same subject and object in the future. That the MARI decision Number: 647/K/sip/1973 which states: "The existence or absence of the principle of ne bis in idem is not solely determined by the parties, but especially that the object of the dispute has been given a certain status by a previous Court decision and has permanent legal force". So the judge has the right to reject or not accept the lawsuit from the plaintiff to the plaintiff for a lawsuit whose subject and object are the same

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal Of Humanities Education and Social Sciences (IJHESS)
Published
2025-04-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.55227/ijhess.v4i5.1564
Primary Topic
Legal Studies and Policies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Analysis Of The Plaintiff's Lawsuit For The Defendant's Unlawful Act To Control The Rights To Land Owned By Another Person Which Was Rejected By The Rokan Hilir State Court (Niet Onvankelijk Verklaard) For Ne Bis In Idem Reasons Based On May Ruling N

Nimrot Siahaan, Sriono Sriono, Jhonni Simanjuntak
International Journal Of Humanities Education and Social Sciences (IJHESS)
Legal Studies and Policies
article

Analysis Of The Plaintiff's Lawsuit For The Defendant's Unlawful Act To Control The Rights To Land Owned By Another Person Which Was Rejected By The Rokan Hilir State Court (Niet Onvankelijk Verklaard) For Ne Bis In Idem Reasons Based On May Ruling N

Nimrot Siahaan, Sriono Sriono, Jhonni Simanjuntak
article en

Abstract

This study aims to examine the application of the Defendant's Unlawful Acts in the Plaintiff's Land Rights Dispute Rejected by the Rokan Hilir District Court (Niet Onvankelijk Verklaard) Due to NeBis In Idem Reasons based on Supreme Court Decision Number: 4348 K/Pdt/2022 and Decision Number 42/Pdt.G/2023/PN Rhl). The type of research used is normative legal research. Discussion Results: the lawsuit dated September 22, 2023 which was received and registered at the Rokan Hilir District Court Clerk's Office on September 25, 2023 with Registration Number 42/Pdt.G/2023/PN Rhl, cannot be accepted (niet ontvankelijke verklaard) by the judge for several reasons, including: the plaintiff's lawsuit against the Defendants in the same object has occurred in the Rokan Hilir District Court with Decision Number 34/Pdt.G/2020/PN.Rhl to the Cassation level at the Supreme Court, so that in accordance with the MARI decision Number: 4348 K/Pdt/2022 dated December 13, 2022, the case has been decided and has permanent legal force. This is in accordance with the provisions of Article 1917 of the Civil Code, which reads "The power of a Judge's decision that has obtained absolute force is not broader than just regarding the matter of the decision. This means that a case that has been decided by a previous judge and has obtained permanent legal force cannot be sued again with the same subject and object in the future. That the MARI decision Number: 647/K/sip/1973 which states: "The existence or absence of the principle of ne bis in idem is not solely determined by the parties, but especially that the object of the dispute has been given a certain status by a previous Court decision and has permanent legal force". So the judge has the right to reject or not accept the lawsuit from the plaintiff to the plaintiff for a lawsuit whose subject and object are the same

International Journal Of Humanities Education and Social Sciences (IJHESS)Vol. 4(5)
Universitas Al-washliyah Labuhanbatu (ID), Universitas Labuhanbatu (ID)
Openalex Percentile: Top 82%
Legal Studies and Policies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.