Finalitas Semu dalam Putusan Perdata: Analisis Komparatif atas Keberatan Pihak Ketiga dan Teori Ketidakhadiran di Indonesia

Abstract

This article examined the paradox of judgment finality in Indonesian civil procedure, particularly when judgments that had acquired final and binding legal force (inkracht van gewijsde) encountered enforcement obstacles following third-party opposition (derden verzet). The study aimed to analyze the tension between legal certainty and substantive justice and to explain how the absence of interested parties could affect the completeness of judicial proceedings. It employed normative legal research and a comparative approach by examining Indonesian procedural law and the doctrines of res judicata, joinder, third-party rights, and due process in selected civil-law and common-law traditions. The analysis applied the Theory of Absence as a conceptual framework for understanding procedural incompleteness in adjudication. The findings informed the proposed concept of “illusory finality,” referring to a condition in which a judgment was formally final but remained subject to substantive concerns because relevant parties or interests had been absent from the preceding proceedings. The article also conceptualized third-party opposition as a corrective mechanism capable of exposing deficiencies in prior adjudication. This analysis highlighted the importance of procedural completeness and participatory justice in understanding the relationship between judgment finality, legal certainty, and substantive justice.