THE PRINCIPLE OF JUSTICE IN SUPREME COURT DECISION NO. 675 K/PDT.SUS-PHI/2025 FOR WORKERS

Pricillia Imanuela; Rasji

doi:10.56301/awl.v8i1.1898

Pricillia Imanuela Faculty of Law, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta, Indonesia
Rasji Faculty of Law, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta, Indonesia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.56301/awl.v8i1.1898

Keywords: Unilateral Termination of Employment, Judicial Review, Substantive Justice, Legal Remedies

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of Judicial Review as a substantive corrective legal remedy against Supreme Court cassation decisions that fail to grant the full scope of workers’ normative entitlements in cases of unilateral termination of employment, as well as to identify the critical barriers that limit workers’ access to such remedies. This research employs a normative juridical method with a statutory and case-study approach, focusing on a critical analysis of Supreme Court Decision No. 675 K/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2025. The findings conclude that Judicial Review holds significant potential as a safeguard for justice in correcting discrepancies in cassation decisions that grant only a minimal portion of workers’ rights. However, this potential is hindered by two layers of constraints: regulatory uncertainty due to the absence of specific provisions on Judicial Review within the Law on Industrial Relations Dispute Settlement, and practical obstacles arising from the Supreme Court’s restrictive judicial posture combined with the high financial and temporal burdens imposed on workers. It is recommended that the Supreme Court issue a Supreme Court Regulation easing the requirements for Judicial Review for workers based on the favor laboris principle, in order to realise substantive justice that is prompt, simple, and cost-efficient.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Pricillia Imanuela, Faculty of Law, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta, Indonesia

Faculty of Law

Rasji, Faculty of Law, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta, Indonesia

Faculty of Law

References

Aristoteles. (1980). Nicomachean Ethics (W. D. Ross (ed.)). Oxford University Press.

Faiz, P. M. (2016). Dimensi Judicial Activism dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Jurnal Konstitusi, 13(2), 406–430. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1328

Harahap, A. M., Ahyani, H., Huda, M., Mutmainah, N., Azmi, N., & Lousada, S. A. N. (2024). Social Justice in the Welfare of Private Lecturers: A Legal Review of Salaries, Certification, and BPJS Ketenagakerjaan in Indonesia. Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum Dan Keadilan, 12(3), 650–674. https://doi.org/10.29303/ius.v12i3.1428

Julyano, M., & Sulistyawan, A. Y. (2019). Pemahaman Terhadap Asas Kepastian Hukum Melalui Konstruksi Penalaran Positivisme Hukum. CREPIDO, 1(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.14710/crepido.1.1.13-22

Kelsen, H. (2007). Teori Umum Hukum dan Negara: Dasar-Dasar Ilmu Hukum Normatif Sebagai Ilmu Hukum Deskriptif-Empirik. BEE Media Indonesia.

Kementerian Ketenagakerjaan Republik Indonesia. (2025). Tenaga Kerja Ter-PHK, Januari Tahun 2025. Kementerian Ketenagakerjaan Republik Indonesia. https://satudata.kemnaker.go.id/data/kumpulan-data/2741

Kiemas, A., Matheus, J., & Gunadi, A. (2023). Redefining Bankruptcy Law: Incorporating the Principle of Business Continuity for Fair Debt Resolution. Rechtsidee, 11(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.21070/jihr.v12i2.996

Liswana, N., Rusnan, Jayadi, H., & Umam, K. (2025). KEWENANGAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM MELAKUKAN JUDICIAL ACTIVISM. Jurnal Diskresi, 4(1), 102–112. https://doi.org/10.29303/diskresi.v4i1.7426

Mertokusumo, S. (1998). Hukum Acara Perdata Indonesia. Liberty.

Mustakim, M. (2022). Kajian Hukum Peniadaan Peninjauan Kembali dalam Perselisihan Hubungan Industrial. ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata, 8(1), 127–140.

Rahardjo, S. (2011). Hukum Progresif: Hukum yang Membebaskan. Jurnal Hukum Progresif, 1(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.14710/hp.1.1.1-24

Rahardjo, S. (2019). Hukum Progresif: Sebuah Sintesa Hukum Indonesia. Genta Publishing.

Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.

Rishan, I. (2024). Populisme Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Penafsiran Perkara-Perkara pada Wilayah Open Legal Policy. Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM, 31(3), 585–609. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol31.iss3.art5

Sania, I. K. (2025). Perkembangan dan Tantangan Hukum Ketenagakerjaan: Tinjauan terhadap Dinamika Regulasi dan Hak-Hak Pekerja. Indonesian Journal of Law and Justice, 2(3), 10. https://doi.org/10.47134/ijlj.v2i3.3656

Sen, A. (2011). The Idea of Justice. Penguin Books.

Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2006). Penelitian Hukum Normatif (Suatu Tinjauan Singkat). Rajawali Press.

Sunaryo, S. (2023). The philosophy of social injustice for all Indonesian laborers set forth in Job Creation Law. Legality : Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum, 31(1), 112–123. https://doi.org/10.22219/ljih.v31i1.25330

Tulaseket, R. (2020). Praktik Judicial Activism dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. Lex Administratum, 8(3).

Wibowo, S. H., & Matheus, J. (2023). Tinjauan Yuridis Pemberian Uang Pesangon Kepada Karyawan yang Di-PHK Pasca Pengesahan Perppu Cipta Kerja. NUSANTARA: Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial, 10(5), 2560–2565. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.31604/jips.v10i5.2023.2560-2565