Main Article Content
The existence of provisions regarding Forced Money/Dwangsom in the implementation of PTUN Decisions provides legal certainty for the public to obtain their rights. However, in its implementation questions arise, how the concept of implementing dwangsom was implemented and where the source of funds used came from. So in practice very few courts apply forced money. Based on the results of normative research using statutory, historical, comparative and conceptual approaches, this research carried out an analysis of the concept and application of dwangsom in PTUN in Indonesia and provided a comparative picture of the regulation of forced money in several countries. In this research, it was found that the concept of dwangsom in the execution of PTUN decisions began to be regulated in article 116 of Law Number 51 of 2009. Based on a comparative analysis of the concept of dwangsom in Thailand and the Netherlands, it was found that the decision execution mechanism applies mutatis mutandis to the provisions of civil procedural law. The institution authorized to implement forced money is determined hierarchically by the officials above it. Even though the amount of the dwangsom money is not included in the petitum, the judge can carry out rechtvinding because basically the judge is bound by the principle of ius curia novit.