Administrative Clemency and Legal Correction in Article 36 Of the UU KUP: A Proposal for Normative Redesign
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46799/ijssr.v6i6.1411Keywords:
Article 36 UU KUP, Administrative Clemency, Administrative Discretion, Legal Certainty, Regulatory RedesignAbstract
Article 36 of Indonesia’s Law on General Provisions and Tax Procedures (UU KUP) serves as an important mechanism for addressing administrative sanctions, material errors, and procedural defects in tax administration. However, the provision applies a uniform discretionary formulation through the term “may” to fundamentally different forms of authority, creating ambiguity between administrative clemency and legality-based correction. This design has raised concerns regarding legal certainty, taxpayer protection, and the consistency of administrative decision-making. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the substantive characteristics of Article 36 paragraph (1) and evaluate the compatibility of its discretionary formulation with the principles of legality, legal certainty, and administrative justice. This research employed a normative juridical method using statutory and conceptual approaches. Primary legal materials consist of relevant legislation and Constitutional Court decisions, while secondary materials include scholarly books and journal articles on tax law and administrative law. Data were analyzed qualitatively through descriptive, analytical, and prescriptive legal reasoning. The findings reveal an ontological dualism within Article 36, where administrative clemency and legality-based correction are regulated under a single discretionary framework despite their distinct legal characteristics. While administrative clemency appropriately involves discretion, the correction of material inaccuracies and serious procedural defects constitutes a legal obligation that should be treated as bound authority. The study proposes a normative redesign separating these domains and transforming legality-based correction into an imperative duty. Such reconstruction enhances legal certainty, strengthens taxpayer protection, improves judicial review, and reinforces the rule of law within Indonesia’s tax administration system.
References
Agustina, E. (2020). Hukum pajak dan penerapannya untuk kesejahteraan sosial. Solusi, 391–402.
Amrie, A. I. (2018). Kajian yuridis pelaksanaan freies ermessen ditinjau dari Pasal 10 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan. Lex Privatum, 52–59.
Ariyanti, R. N., & Mutiah, N. (2023). Hak dan kewajiban wajib pajak serta otoritas perpajakan setelah keluarnya Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2021 tentang harmonisasi peraturan perpajakan. ADIL: Jurnal Hukum, 1–27.
Asshiddiqie, J. (2021). Teori hierarki norma hukum. Konstitusi Press.
DDTCNews. (2024, December 9). WP ajukan uji materi aturan pengurangan, pembatalan, dan gugatan pajak.
Dewi, D. A. S. (2016). Pendayagunaan freies ermessen pejabat pemerintahan dalam konsep negara kesejahteraan. Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, 184–194.
Endang, M. I. A. (2018). Diskresi dan tanggung jawab pejabat pemerintahan menurut Undang-Undang Administrasi Pemerintahan. Jurnal Hukum Peratun, 223–244.
Hulu, S., & Pujiyono. (2018). Pertanggungjawaban pidana atas tindakan diskresi pejabat pemerintahan. Masalah-Masalah Hukum, 167–174.
Khalimi, K. (2025). The role of the Tax Court in the judicial system: Implications of Constitutional Court Decision No. 26/PUU-XII/2023 for tax law. Jurnal Akta, 1060–1075.
Kurniawan, D. (2025). Penyelesaian sengketa pajak yang berkepastian hukum: Studi Putusan Nomor PIT-008487.99/2022/PP/M.IIA, PUT-109920.99/2014/PP/M.IA, PUT-141/B/PJK/2015. JIIP: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Pendidikan, 12948–12953.
Latif, A. (2014). Hukum administrasi negara dalam praktik tindak pidana korupsi. Prenada Media Group.
Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. (2024). Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 168/PUU-XXII/2024 tentang pengujian Undang-Undang Ketentuan Umum dan Tata Cara Perpajakan.
Marmiyati, M., Hien, U. K. K., JM, H. S., Ka, P. S., Prasetyo, P., & Kustanto, A. (2024). Improving efficiency in Indonesia's tax objection process: Reducing bureaucracy and enhancing access to the Tax Court. Law Development Journal, 97–109.
Nainggolan, S. M. (2023). Kepastian hukum Pasal 36 ayat (1) huruf a UU KUP sebagai upaya mencegah disparitas putusan. Collegium Studiosum Journal, 1–9.
Nasriyan, I. (2019). Asas kepastian hukum dalam penyelenggaraan perpajakan di Indonesia. Logika: Jurnal Penelitian Universitas Kuningan, 87–93.
Purba, R., Hutagalung, S., & Manullang, J. (2023). Asas kepastian hukum dalam perpajakan di Indonesia. JURMA: Jurnal Riset Manajemen, 14–20.
Republik Indonesia. (2014). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan.
Ridwan HR. (2011). Hukum administrasi negara. Rajawali Pers.
Santoso, I., Rahayu, N., & Gunadi, G. (2025). Review of certainty aspect and revenue productivity principles in the secondary transfer pricing adjustment policy in Indonesia. Lex Localis: Journal of Local Self-Government, 2854–2866.
Setiawan, A., & Asyikin, N. (2020). Tanggung jawab jabatan dan tanggung jawab pribadi dalam penggunaan diskresi sebagai instrumen pelayanan publik. Jurnal Mimbar Hukum, 73–88.
Tanudjaja, W., Wijanarko, S., Teguh, J. S., & Tjoa, R. (2025). Upaya hukum bidang perpajakan. Jurnal Pendidikan, 1832–1843.
Wijaya, G., & Urbanisasi, U. (2025). Keadilan dan kepastian hukum dalam sistem perpajakan Indonesia. Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat dan Riset Pendidikan, 11915–11921.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Adriana Dwi Hardjanti, Marhaeni Ria Siombo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International. that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
