In procedural law, the term “exception” is often mistaken for an objection to the substance of a case, when in fact it refers to an objection concerning the formal aspects of a lawsuit.
Referring to the explanation in Hukum Acara Perdata tentang Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan, Pembuktian dan Putusan Pengadilan by M. Yahya Harahap, there is a type of exception known as a procedural exception. This type concerns the formal requirements of a claim. If a lawsuit contains procedural defects, it fails to meet the formal criteria for validity and must be declared inadmissible (niet ontvankelijk verklaard).
One form of procedural exception relates to jurisdiction, which is divided into two categories: absolute jurisdiction and relative jurisdiction.
An exception based on absolute jurisdiction is an objection raised by the defendant asserting that the court handling the case lacks fundamental jurisdiction. This usually involves an error in selecting the correct judicial forum. For example, in an inheritance dispute involving Muslim parties, if the lawsuit is filed in a district court, the defendant may raise an exception arguing that the district court lacks jurisdiction, as the matter falls under the authority of the religious court according to jurisdictional rules.
Exceptions based on absolute jurisdiction may be submitted at any stage during the first instance proceedings, up until a ruling is issued. This is affirmed in Article 134 of the Herziene Indonesisch Reglement (HIR), which stipulates that if a case falls outside the jurisdiction of a district court, any party may at any time request the judge to declare a lack of jurisdiction. Moreover, the judge is obliged to declare such a lack of jurisdiction on their own initiative if it is evident.
In contrast, an exception based on relative jurisdiction addresses an error in selecting the court within the same judicial environment. This type of objection is raised when the defendant believes the plaintiff filed the case in a court that is geographically or domiciliary inappropriate. For instance, if the defendant resides in South Jakarta but the case is filed in the Central Jakarta District Court, the defendant may object on the grounds that the case should have been filed in the South Jakarta District Court.
Unlike absolute jurisdiction, exceptions based on relative jurisdiction are subject to stricter time constraints. They must be submitted during the first hearing and simultaneously with the initial response to the claim. This is in line with Article 133 HIR, which states that objections to relative jurisdiction are inadmissible if the defendant has already submitted another form of response before raising the objection.
Procedural exceptions serve an important role in maintaining order and procedural correctness within the judicial system. By understanding the distinction between absolute and relative jurisdictional exceptions, both plaintiffs and defendants can use these legal tools to ensure that a case is tried in the appropriate forum. This understanding also promotes efficiency and compliance with procedural law throughout court proceedings. Ultimately, exceptions are not intended to avoid the substance of the case, but rather to uphold the proper legal processes within the judicial framework.