Rekonstruksi Finalitas Putusan Pengadilan Pajak Menuju Keadilan Substantif Dalam Perspektif Hukum Progresif

Abstrak

The finality of Tax Court decisions constitutes a distinctive feature of Indonesia’s tax dispute resolution system. As a court of first and final instance, the Tax Court produces decisions that are immediately final and binding, with judicial review serving as the only extraordinary legal remedy. This legal policy was designed to ensure legal certainty, procedural efficiency, and fiscal stability. However, the increasing complexity of tax disputes raises concerns regarding the adequacy of corrective mechanisms when fundamental legal errors, judicial mistakes, or procedural violations occur. Previous studies have predominantly focused on institutional aspects of the Tax Court, the legal basis of finality, and procedural issues surrounding judicial review, while limited attention has been given to the philosophical and legal implications of finality through the perspective of Progressive Law. This study aims to analyze the legal politics underlying the finality of Tax Court decisions and to formulate a reconstruction model based on Satjipto Rahardjo’s Progressive Law theory. Using normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, historical, and comparative approaches, this study finds that the current model reflects a dominant orientation toward legal certainty and fiscal efficiency while providing insufficient protection for substantive justice. As a theoretical contribution, this article introduces the concept of Progressive Finality, which redefines finality as a general rule while allowing limited corrective review in cases involving fundamental legal errors, serious violations of due process, manifest judicial errors, and unjustifiable deviations from established jurisprudence. The study concludes that legal certainty and substantive justice are not mutually exclusive values and should be integrated through a more balanced framework of tax adjudication