Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 281 Download : 275

Main Article Content

Abstract

Indonesian civil procedure law does not yet regulate the res sub judice doctrine, which risks leading to duplicate lawsuits and different decisions because the HIR and RBg only contain provisions on relative and absolute competence. To analyze the comparative regulation of sub judice and res sub judice and to offer an ideal concept for their application in Indonesian civil procedure law. It offers a normative framework to fill legal gaps and prevent forum shopping, an issue that has not been studied in depth before. This study conducts normative legal research using a statutory, conceptual, and comparative approach, referencing practices in India, the UK, Canada, and Kenya. The principle of sub judice protects the judiciary from external influence, while the principle of res sub judice ensures efficiency and legal certainty by prohibiting the double examination of the same dispute. Its integration into Indonesian civil procedure law is necessary through the judge's obligation to declare a double lawsuit inadmissible (niet ontvankelijk verklaard) and the plaintiff's obligation to attach a statement confirming the absence of a similar lawsuit to maintain legal certainty and support the principles of fast, simple, and low-cost justice.

Keywords

Civil Procedural Law Lawsuit Res Sub Judice

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Susilo, E., & Kamali , K. M. I. (2025). Preventing Duplication of Civil Cases: Integrating Res Sub Judice into Indonesian Procedural Law. Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum, 10(1), 149-165. https://doi.org/10.24198/jbmh.v10i1.2477
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Agrawa, Aishwarya. “Doctrine of Res Sub Judice: Section 10 CPC.” LawBhoomi, 2023. https://lawbhoomi.com/doctrine-of-res-sub-judice-section-10-cpc/.
  2. Akbar, Aksan, La Ode Awal Sakti, and Faisal Herisetiawan Jafar. “Penerapan Restorative Justice Dalam Perkara Korupsi Sebagai Wujud Peradilan Sederhana, Cepat, Dan Biaya Ringan.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 8, no. 2 (2023). https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v8i2.6822.
  3. Amadea, Nathania, Fatmi Utarie Nasution, and Sherly Ayuna Putri. “The Appointing of a Legal Guardian Based on Audi et Alteram Partem Principle and Only One Guardian Principle.” SIGn Jurnal Hukum 4, no. 1 (2022). https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v4i1.185.
  4. Barkat Ali, and Hafiz Aziz-ur-Rehman. “Public Interest Litigation: Economic Implications (A Critical Appraisal of Reko DIQ Case).” Research Journal of Social Sciences and Economics Review (RJSSER) 1, no. 4 (2020). https://doi.org/10.36902/rjsser-vol1-iss4-2020(63-71).
  5. Barokah, Muhamad Raziv, and Anna Erliyana. “Pergeseran Kompetensi Absolut Dari Peradilan Umum Ke Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara: Gugatan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Oleh Penguasa (Onrechtmatige Overheidsdaad).” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 51, no. 4 (2021).
  6. Boedhiarti, Endhang. “Urgensi Pengaturan Contempt Of Court Di Indonesia Di Masa Yang Akan Datang (Ius Constituendum).” Jurnal JURISTIC 1, no. 03 (2021). https://doi.org/10.35973/jrs.v2i02.2556.
  7. Butt, Simon. “Indonesia’s Criminal Justice System on Trial: The Jessica Wongso Case.” New Criminal Law Review, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2021.24.1.3.
  8. Coish, Jeremia M., and Adam J. MacNeil. “Out of the Frying Pan and into the Fire? Due Diligence Warranted for ADE in COVID-19.” Microbes and Infection, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micinf.2020.06.006.
  9. Deva, Surya. “Threats To Hong Kong’S Autonomy From the Npc’S Standing Committee: The Role of Courts and the Basic Structure Doctrine.” Hong Kong Law Journal 50, no. 3 (2020): 901–33.
  10. Elmiyah, Nurul, and Suparjo Sujadi. “Upaya-Upaya Hukum Terhadap Penetapan.” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 35, no. 3 (2017). https://doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol35.no3.1520.
  11. Fadli, Muhammad. “Tindakan Penghinaan Yang Menghambat Proses Peradilan (Contempt Of Court) Dalam Penegakan Hukum Di Indonesia.” Jurnal Analisis Hukum 3, no. 1 (2020). https://doi.org/10.38043/jah.v3i1.2682.
  12. Finallisa, Finallisa, Widhi Handoko, and Mujiono Hafidh Prasetyo. “Pelaksanaan Putusan Yang Bersifat Condemnatoir Dalam Perkara Pembagian Harta Bersama (Studi Kasus Di Pengadilan Agama Kudus).” Notarius 13, no. 1 (2020). https://doi.org/10.14710/nts.v13i1.30468.
  13. Goel, Shivam. “‘Rome Has Spoken, the Cause Has Ended; Rome Spoke through Her Laws.’” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2019. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3307814.
  14. Gunther, Wagner Engelenburg, I Ketut Artadi, and I Gusti Ayu Agung Ari Krisnawati. “Upaya Hukum Terhadap Putusan Sela Serta Pengaruhnya Terhadap Suatu Perkara Perdata (Studi Kasus Di Pengadilan Negeri Denpasar).” Kertha Wicara: Journal Ilmu Hukum 4, no. 1 (2015).
  15. Harahap, Yahya. Hukum Acara Perdata: Tentang Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan, Pembuktian, Dan Putusan Pengadilan. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2019.
  16. Indonesia, Mahkamah Agung Republik. “Direktori Putusan.” Accessed November 26, 2024. https://putusan3.mahkamahagung.go.id/peraturan/download_file/11eace75c6c58890bdbb313935333032/pdf/11eace75c6c582d08d84313935333032.html.
  17. Ionescu, Steluța. “Public Character Of The Civil Trial – Between Principle Symbolism And The Need For Justice Efficiency.” Valahia University Law Study 39, no. 1 (2022). https://doi.org/10.53373/vuls.2022.39.1.010.
  18. Jagannathan, Murali, and Venkata Santosh Kumar Delhi. “Paths Leading Contractual Disputes to Litigation.” Built Environment Project and Asset Management 13, no. 6 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-02-2023-0042.
  19. Khan, Azhar Jahangir. “Res Judicata and Its Applicability in Various Proceedings in India.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2011. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1102910.
  20. Klopp, Jacqueline M. “Pilfering the Public: The Problem of Land Grabbing in Contemporary Kenya.” Africa Today 47, no. 1 (2000). https://doi.org/10.2979/AFT.2000.47.1.6.
  21. Lie, Erick Sambuari, Muhamad H Soepeno, and Adi T Koesumo. “Implikasi Hukum Pihak Yang Tidak Melaksanakan Putusan Pengadilan Dalam Perkara Perdata.” Lex Privatum XI, no. 3 (2023).
  22. Lu, Song. “The EOS Engineering Corporation Case and the Nemo Debet Bis Vexari Pro Una et Eadem Causa Principle in China.” Chinese Journal of International Law 7, no. 1 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1093/chinesejil/jmn007.
  23. Madjid, Neni Vesna, and Afrinal Afrinal. “Hak Ahli Waris Pekerja Meninggal Dunia Dalam Hukum Ketenagakerjaan Di Indonesia (Analisis Putusan PHI Pada PN Surabaya Nomor 74/G/2014/PHI.SBY Jo. Putusan MA RI No. 225 K/PDT.SUS PHI/2015).” UNES Law Review 4, no. 2 (2021). https://doi.org/10.31933/unesrev.v4i2.223.
  24. Makam, Ganesh. “Doctrines in Res Sub Judice: A Comprehensive Review of the Civil Procedure Code in India.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2023. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4484556.
  25. Mohd Sheriff, Shukriah. “Sub Judice And Gag Order: The Recent Development In Malaysia.” IIUM Law Journal 30, no. 2 (2022). https://doi.org/10.31436/iiumlj.v30i2.753.
  26. Muhaimin. Metode Penelitian Hukum. Mataram: Mataram University Press, 2020.
  27. Musmuliadin, Erlyn Indarti, and Nur Rochaeti. “Contempt of Court in Renewal of Indonesian Criminal Law Based on Pancasila.” International Conference Restructuring and Transforming Law 2022 1, no. 1 (2022).
  28. Nwangeneh, Raleke I. “An Analysis of the Sub Judice Rule in Nigerian Legal Jurisprudence.” Nnamdi Azikiwe University Journal of International Law and Jurisprudence 15, no. 1 (2022): 84–91.
  29. Pardede, Sonora Gokma, and Febby Mutiara Nelson. “Pengaruh Trial By The Press Terhadap Penegakan Hukum Pidana Di Indonesia.” LITIGASI 24, no. 2 (2023). https://doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v24i2.10259.
  30. Pasaribu, Alboin, and Intan Permata Putri. “Prospek Penjatuhan Putusan Provisi Dalam Perkara Pengujian Undang-Undang (Prospect for Granting Provisional Decisions in Judicial Review).” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2021. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3882393.
  31. Pathak, Harshad, and Pratyush Panjwani. “Parallel Proceedings in Indian Arbitration Law: Invoking Lis Pendens.” Journal of International Arbitration 34, no. 3 (2017). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4155486.
  32. Pradana, Fadly Ikhsan. “Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Yang Tidak Dilaksanakan Dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang Ditinjau Dari Asas Erga Omnes.” Indonesian State Law Review (ISLRev) 3, no. 2 (2021). https://doi.org/10.15294/islrev.v3i2.45660.
  33. Quddus, Usman, and Ghufran Ahmed. “Independence of Judiciary in Malaysia and Pakistan : The Way Forward.” Journal of Law & Social Studies 5, no. 3 (2023): 525–36. https://doi.org/10.52279/jlss.05.03.525536.
  34. R Danang Noor Kusumo, Erwin Susilo. Hukum Perubahan Jenis Kelamin. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2020.
  35. Safira, Martha Eri. Hukum Acara Perdata. Ponorogo: CV. Nata Karya, 2017.
  36. Sari, Retno Dewi Pulung. Hukum Acara Dan Praktik Persidangan Perdata. Sleman: Penerbit KYTA, 2022.
  37. Solomon, Rukundo. “The Subject of Sub Judice: An Analysis of the Sub Judice Rule in Uganda.” Commonwealth Law Bulletin 45, no. 4 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/03050718.2020.1742175.
  38. Sujayadi, Sujayadi, Tata Wijayanta, and Herliana Herliana. “Actor Sequitur Forum Rei: A Theoritical Study.” Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum 7, no. 2 (2023). https://doi.org/10.23920/jbmh.v7i2.896.
  39. ———. “Regulating Court Jurisdiction to Protect Weaker Parties: An Overview of the Indonesian Civil Justice System.” Yuridika 38, no. 2 (2023). https://doi.org/10.20473/ydk.v38i2.43835.
  40. Szabados, Tamás. “In Search of the Holy Grail of the Conflict of Laws of Cultural Property: Recent Trends in European Private International Law Codifications.” International Journal of Cultural Property 27, no. 3 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739120000223.
  41. Tipu, Umar Farooq. “Doctrine of Res Sub Judice and Res Judicata in CPC, 1908.” Available at SSRN 3714151, 2020. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3714151.
  42. Tiranda, Irianto, Fenty Puluhulawa, and Johan Jasin. “Konsep Ideal Penanganan Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Pungutan Liar Berdasarkan Asas Peradilan.” Jambura Law Review 1, no. 2 (2019). https://doi.org/10.33756/jalrev.v1i2.2119.
  43. Triningsih, Anna, Achmad Edi Subiyanto, and Nurhayani Nurhayani. “Kesadaran Berkonstitusi Bagi Penegak Hukum Terhadap Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Sebagai Upaya Menjaga Kewibawaan Peradilan.” Jurnal Konstitusi 18, no. 4 (2022). https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1848.
  44. Tubridy, Kate. “Facebook and a Fair Trial: Caution, Challenge and Contradiction.” Law, Technology and Humans 2, no. 1 (2020). https://doi.org/10.5204/lthj.v2i1.1497.
  45. Upadhyay, Divya. “Unleashing India’s Inventive Capital: Intellectual Property as Loan Collateral.” Law and Financial Markets Review 17, no. 3 (2023): 225–37.
  46. Zaeni Dahlan, and Ian Aji Hermawan. “Tinjauan Yuridis Eksepsi Kompetensi Relatif Dalam Perkara Perdata.” Academia: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Humaniora 2, no. 1 (2022). https://doi.org/10.54622/academia.v2i1.30.
  47. Zulaichah, Siti. “The Important of Designing Legislation on Indonesian Contempt of Court Act: Legal Practitioners Perspective.” Borobudur Law Review 5, no. 1 (2023). https://doi.org/10.31603/burrev.6584.