Analisis Yuridis Daya Ikat Rekomendasi Ombudsman RI dalam Penyelesaian Maladministrasi

Abstract

This study examines the binding force of recommendations issued by the Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia and their legal consequences in resolving maladministration. This normative legal study applies statutory and conceptual approaches, using qualitative analysis and deductive reasoning to examine legislation and documented follow-up data. The analysis finds that the phrase “legally binding” in Law No. 37 of 2008 creates a legal obligation for reported agencies to implement recommendations and report their follow-up; recommendations are not merely advice that agencies may freely disregard. This obligation is reinforced by the connection between the Ombudsman’s authority and the responsibilities of both the reported party and its superior within the public-service legal framework. However, normative binding force is distinct from executory force: the Ombudsman cannot directly compel implementation of a recommendation. Follow-up data for 2021–2024 show that 58 percent of recommendations were implemented, 17 percent were not implemented, and 25 percent remained under monitoring. In 2024, one of five recommendations had been implemented, while the other four remained under monitoring. These findings reveal a gap between clearly established legal obligations and enforcement mechanisms that do not ensure complete implementation. Theoretically, this study clarifies the distinction between normative binding force and executory force, positioning recommendations as legally consequential administrative oversight instruments, but not judicial decisions. It concludes that recommendations must be acted upon.