Keywords
Cancellation of Population Documents, Citizen Rights, Contrarius Actus Principle
Document Type
Article
Abstract
This research describes and examines the implementation of the Contrarius Actus principle in cancelling population documents and the obstacles to applying the Contrarius Actus principle in cancelling population documents. The type of research used is descriptive empirical research with a qualitative approach. The description of the research results is complemented by primary and literature data relevant to the research topic. The results of this study indicate that the application of cancelling population documents through the Contrarius Actus principle has its criteria, namely, not changing the meaning in population documents and population documents issued by the Population and Civil Registration Office. Based on the analysis of implementation theory by Merilee S. Grindle, implementing the Contrarius Actus principle in cancelling population documents follows and fulfils the indicators of the success of policy implementation, namely policy content and implementation environment. Although this implementation has gone well, some internal and external obstacles remain. Internal barriers include the absence of templates and detailed steps from the centre and the absence of Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) updates. External barriers include the high number of applications, the lack of understanding of this principle among the population, and the difficulty in determining the time between the applicant and the head of the field for the interview.
First Page
196
Last Page
205
Page Range
196-205
Issue
1
Volume
22
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
10.21831/jc.v22i1.1283
Recommended Citation
Tristiana, E., Wicaksono, M. B., Mahardika, A. P., & Kewha, N. (2025). Legal analysis of the application of the principle of Contrarius Actus related to the cancellation of documents to fulfil citizen’s rights in population administration at the population and civil registration office. Jurnal Civics: Media Kajian Kewarganegaraan, 22(1), 196-205. https://doi.org/10.21831/jc.v22i1.1283
References
Ackerly, B. A. (2016). Girls rising for human rights: Not magic, politics. Journal of International Political Theory, 12(1), 26-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1755088215613626
De Vanna, F. (2015). The “Doctrine of Principles” in neo-constitutional theories and the principle of reasonableness in action. In Ius Gentium (Vol. 46). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19180-5_5
Enemark, S., Hvingel, L., & Galland, D. (2014). Land administration, planning and human rights. Planning Theory, 13(4), 331-348. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095213517882
Farahat, A., & Leijten, I. (2022). Human rights overreach? Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 40(2), 83-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519221099814
Grindle, M. S. (Ed.). (1980). Politics and policy implementation in the third world. Princeton University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1m323qj
Hadjon, P. M., & Djatmiati, T. S. (2024). Argumentasi hukum (Eleventh). Gadjah Mada University Press.
Izhharulhaq, M. Y., Rompis, A. E., & Cahyadini, A. (2020). The role of the Contrarius Actus principle in oversight of the growth and development of community organizations. Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, 8(3), 432. https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v8i3.31702
Kirby, J. (2021). African leadership in human rights: The Gambia and The Commonwealth Human Rights Commission, 1977–83. Journal of Contemporary History, 56(1), 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022009420911069
Krain, M., Murdie, A., & Beard, A. (2024). Silencing human rights defenders once and for all? Determinants of Human Rights Defenders’ Killings. Political Research Quarterly, 77(1), 401-416. https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231217282
Lorion, S. (2021). Inside the Human Rights Ministry of Burkina Faso: How professionalised civil servants shape governmental human rights focal points. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 39(2), 95-118. https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519211018149
Nalle, V. I. (2017). Asas Contarius Actus pada Perpu ormas: Kritik dalam perspektif hukum Administrasi Negara dan Hak Asasi Manusia. PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law), 4(2), 244–262. https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v4n2.a2
Neves, M. (2021). Constitutionalism and the paradox of principles and rules: Between the hydra and hercules. In Constitutionalism and the Paradox of Principles and Rules: Between the Hydra and Hercules. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898746.001.0001
Pegram, T. (2015). Global human rights governance and orchestration: National human rights institutions as intermediaries. European Journal of International Relations, 21(3), 595-620. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066114548079
Radchuk, A., Slavinska, I., Izbash, K., Branowicki, W., & Kozhemiakina, T. (2023). Principles of law in legal regulation of public relations in modern conditions. Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum Dan Keadilan, 11(2), 404–418. https://doi.org/10.29303/ius.v11i2.1485
Shaham-Maymon, G. (2024). Localizing human rights: Modeling human rights cities. Political Studies, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217241284203
Sukadi, I. (2019). The Contrarius Actus principle as the government’s contral to the freedom of association and assembly in Indonesia. Mimbar Keadilan, 12(2), 181. https://doi.org/10.30996/mk.v12i2.2457
Tuzov, D. (2016). Contra ius sententiam dare. Profiles of nullity of judgements in breach of substantive law in the opinions of late classical roman jurists | Contra ius sententiam dare. Profili dell’invalidità della sentenza contraria a diritto nella riflessione giurispru. Zbornik Pravnog Fakulteta u Zagrebu, 66(1), 5–34.
Yazici, E. (2019). Nationalism and human rights. Political Research Quarterly, 72(1), 147-161. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912918781187
Included in
Administrative Law Commons, Civil Law Commons, Civil Procedure Commons, Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons
