ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS OF THE DECISION OF THE INFORMATION COMMISSION IN PUBLIC INFORMATION DISPUTES(Study of Decision Number 010/VI/KIPROV-LPG-PS/2024)

Abstract

The Information Commission serves as a quasi-judicial tribunal authorized to examine and adjudicate public information disputes through non-litigation administrative mechanisms. This study analyzes the jurisdiction of the Lampung Province Information Commission in Decision No. 010/VI/KIPROV-LPG-PS/2024 and evaluates whether its legal reasoning reflects the principles of legal certainty, substantive justice, and legal utility. The research employed a normative juridical (doctrinal) method supported by empirical observations, using primary and secondary legal materials analyzed through statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. The findings demonstrate that the Lampung Province Information Commission possessed both subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute. Nevertheless, although the statutory filing period was generally applied correctly, the decision failed to explain transparently the method used to calculate statutory deadlines and working days. From the perspective of justice, the rejection of the Applicant's legal standing based on the purpose of the information request and minor administrative address discrepancies reflects an overly formalistic approach that undermines substantive justice by preventing a consequence test of the requested information. In terms of legal utility, the decision provides procedural certainty but does not adequately promote transparency and public oversight of regional financial management. Therefore, clearer procedural standards, consistent consequence testing, and refined legal standing criteria are required to strengthen public information dispute resolution