This paper aims to analyze the extent to which the binding power of the Ombudsman's special adjudication decision which is associated with the strength of the court's decision as well as the new authority granted by law to Ombudsman's institution to carry out special adjudication whether or not it is in accordance with the Pancasila philosophy. The research method used in this study is normative juridical using secondary data from primary legal materials, secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials to be analyzed qualitatively. The results show that the binding power of the Ombudsman's special adjudication decision is not the same as the strength of the court's decision. In accordance with Law Number 37 of 2008 on the Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia and Law Number 25 of 2009 on Public Services, the function of the Ombudsman as a court institution is not found, but what is found is that the results of the Ombudsman's investigation are recommendations and Law Number 25 of 2009 on Public Services which provides The authority to carry out special adjudication is not based on the Pancasila philosophy, due to in accordance with the third principle, a balance is required between the interests of the state and the people as mandated by the precepts of unity and integrity. With regard to special adjudication, Law Number 37 of 2008 on the Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia and Law Number 25 of 2009 on Public Services are reviewed, in order to regulate the extent to which the Ombudsman can carry out special adjudication and set concrete sanctions if it does not carry out special adjudication of the Ombudsman.