| Judul | Abstract | Halaman |
|---|
| Perizinan Dalam Kegiatan Pertambangan di Indonesia Pasca UU Minerba No. 4 Tahun 2009 | On 2009, Government of Indonesia has enacted new mining law No. 4 Year 2009. The Indonesian New Mining Law is the revision of the previous law which was considered not longer suitable with the mandate of Article 33 (3) of Indonesian Constitution. The New Indonesian Mining Law, ends the contract of works regime in mining activities in Indonesia. The New Indonesian Mining Law give stronger position for Government of Indonesia in mining activities toward Permits regime as the replacement of contract of works regime to permit regime. However, in establish mining activities in Indonesia required many related permits such as, environmental permit and land use permit, besides mining permit itself. In the practice, some mining activities has obtained permit from mining official but they cannot proceed they activities because, other governmental official did not grant the related permit. Moreover, regional autonomy as regulated by Law No. 32 Year 2004 has also raised potential conflict relating to the establishment of mining activities di Indonesia, especially in dealing with regional ego to increase their income. Therefore, the permits system which relating to mining activities need to be examine to understand the legal issues. | 1-20 |
| Pengaturan Hak Penguasaan Negara Atas Pertambangan Studi Perbandingan Konsepsi Kontrak Karya Dengan Izin Usaha Pertambangan | Mining, as one of the revenue sources of the nation, could donate to the national income for the purpose of enhancing domestic welfare as stated in the Preamble of the 1945 Constitution. During the Old Regime, mining was regulated in Law No. 11 year 1969 concerning Basic Provisions of Mining. This law applied the Concept of âKontrak Karya,â but it has recently been replaced by Law No. 4 Year 2009 concerning Coal and Mineral Mining. The new law regulates that the operation of mining in any phase is conducted based on âIjin Usaha Pertambangan,â in order to accommodate the national interest, regional government, and society in the mining management in Indonesia. | 21-36 |
| Kepastian Hukum Dalam Undang-Undang Minerba | Law Number 11 of 1967 concerning Basic Provisions of Mining is no longer current. Therefore, revision of laws and regulations in the field of mineral and coal mining is required in order to manage and seek potential minerals and coal in an independent, reliable, transparent, competitive, efficient and environmentally sound manner and to sustainably assure national development. A fundamental change from Law Number 4 of 2009 is the changing in the management of mineral and coal mines from contracts of works and coal contracts of works that previously placed the government in equal position with Mining Investors as Civil Law subjects. Now, the law has switched to a Licensing System. The Government is no longer placed alongside Mining Investors; the government is currently acting as the authority to grant Mining Permits. The authority shall be exercised under provisions of laws and regulations which impose legal consequences on both Mining Investors and the government as the licensing authority. Regarding the governmentâs position as regulator, there is an inconsistency in the divestment policy of Law number 4 of 2009. The government still obliges foreign parties to divest their shares to the government as the priority; rightfully, the obligation of share divestment should be addressed to BUMN or BUMD. Transitional provisions in Law number 4 of 2009 regulate that contracts of works and coal contracts of works that already exist prior to the effectiveness of this Law shall remain valid until the contracts/agreements expire, with the provision that all articles that are contained in contracts of works and coal contracts of works must be adjusted to the Law with the exception of state revenues. Mining Concessions (or Kuasa Pertambangan) that already exist prior to the effective date of this law, based on Government Regulation Number 23 of 2010, shall remain valid, but should be adjusted into Mining Permits (or Ijin usaha Pertambangan). | 37-50 |
| Mining Regime in Indonesia Rejuvenated | Industri pertambangan di Indonesia diatur oleh Undang-Undang No. 4 tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara (âUU 4/2009â) yang menggantikan undang-undang lama yang telah berlaku sejak 1967. UU 4/2009 mengubah rezim hukum pertambangan secara signifikan terutama dalam jenis dan prosedur perizinan. UU 4/2009 mengganti sistem kontrak yang berlaku untuk investor asing dengan sistem perizinan yang tersedia bagi investor domestik dan asing. Namun UU 4/2009 tetap mengakui keberadaan Kontrak Karya yang telah ada hingga jangka waktunya berakhir, dengan syarat harus disesuaikan dengan UU 4/2009. Penyesuaian tersebut dilakukan berdasarkan negosiasi antara investor dan Pemerintah. Dengan berlakunya UU 4/2009, baik pemerintah pusat dan maupun daerah akan memiliki peran besar dalam industri pertambangan sesuai dengan pelaksanaan otonomi daerah. Selain itu, prosedur pemberian hak pertambangan sekarang harus dilakukan melalui proses tender, tidak dengan penunjukan langsung sebagaimana yang terjadi sebelumnya. Perubahan lain yang substansial ialah adanya ketentuan khusus yang mengatur mengenai usaha jasa penunjang pertambangan, serta terdapat prioritas untuk menggunakan kontraktor lokal. Perubahan-perubahan tersebut akan dielaborasi di dalam tulisan ini. | 51-64 |
| Inkonsistensi UU No. 4 Tahun 2009 Tentang Minerba Khususnya Dalam Hal Pemberdayaan Hak Masyarakat Hukum Adat | The indigenous rights of the Mahudat people should be a primary consideration in establishing an equitable mining regime in Indonesia. The new mining law has devolved significant authority to local governments that must warrant or assure the tenure and ownership of indigenous peoples to their lands and the mineral resources found therein. The District Governments need to develop new instruments and modalities to balance competing interests between economic development and social and environmental well-being primarily by requiring mining companies to negotiate with these indigenous people to find new formulations for cooperative and equitable partnerships, which include among others: identification of land in customary areas that can or should not be mined (either because of cultural considerations/religious or ecology); rehabilitation of environmental damage; reparation for harm on indigenous inhabitants of the mining areas; and equitable sharing of benefits of mining production. | 65-84 |
| Zakat, Barang Tambang dan Keadilan Sosial di Indonesia | Zakah is a pillar of Islam which is closely related to social justice. It is mandatory for every Muslimâs wealth to meet the zakah provision. All new property can be regarded as wealth, if the property meets two conditions, namely, they can be owned and have benefits to be taken out. Based on those principles scholars argue that all property is subject to zakah, including mining products. Zakah is a fundamental principle to uphold the Islamic social structure, since the proper implementation of zakah will reduce the gap between the rich and the poor. For the Islamic people, zakah is obligatory in the economic, social, and moral respect. In economic field, zakah may prevent the accumulation of wealth on a group of wealthy people, whereas in the social, zakah allows the performance of responsibilities of the rich to the poor. As in the moral field, zakah is expected to purify the property owned by Muzakki (zakah payer), and cleanse the soul of the penurious nature and simultaneously purify society from the nature of envy and jealousy. To achieve social justice, economic justice is needed because economic justice is a prerequisite and a complement of social justice. Economic justice and social justice cannot be separated because the economic justice is the basis on which social justice can be upheld. Positive effects of socio-economic aspects included in the zakah, are able to create social justice in society. | 85-104 |
| Eksistensi Badan Hukum di Indonesia Sebagai Wadah Dalam Menunjang Kehidupan Manusia | Legal personality is known by different names but has the same meaning, e.g.: artificial personality, juridical personality or juristic personality. It refers to the characteristics of a non-human entity regarded by law to have the status of a person. Legal personality allows one or more natural persons to act as a single entity for legal purposes. They may sue and be sued, enter into contracts, incur debts, and have ownership over property. Some countries prohibit legal entities from holding human rights, while other countries permit artificial persons to enjoy protection from the state that are traditionally described as human rights. Legal personality exists in the Indonesian legal system, as it is exist in the modern countries. | 105-122 |
| Judicial Impeachment Mechanism in the Republic of Indonesiaand the United States of America: A Constitutional Law Comparison | Republik Indonesia (RI) dan Amerika Serikat (AS), keduanya memiliki mekanisme impeachment dalam konstitusinya. Walau demikian, secara komparasi hukum di dalam mekanisme impeachment Indonesia dan Amerika terdapat sejumlah perbedaan. Perbedaan-perbedaan tersebut dilatarbelakangi, antara lain oleh iklim demokrasi serta pengalaman demokrasi di masing-masing negara tersebut. Di Indonesia, proses impeachment pertamakali dilakukan pada masa pemerintahan Presiden Sukarno dimana mekanisme impeachment ketika itu belum diatur secara eksplisit dalam Konstitusi Republik Indonesia, Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 (UUD 1945). Setelah dilakukan amandemen ketiga terhadap UUD 1945, barulah mekanisme impeachment diatur secara tegas dalam UUD 1945. Berdasarkan ketentuan UUD 1945 amandemen ketiga, Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia (MKRI) memiliki wewenang yudisial untuk memberikan putusan terhadap pendapat Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR) perihal dugaan pelanggaran oleh Presiden dan/atau Wakil Presiden sebagai pejabat Negara. Sedangkan di Amerika Serikat, proses impeachment telah beberapa kali dilaksanakan, salah satunya proses impeachment terhadap Presiden Bill Clinton pada 19 Desember 1998, dimana Presiden Clinton merupakan presiden terakhir yang terkena proses impeachment sampai saat ini. Namun demikian, dalam perkembangannya Presiden Clinton masih menjalankan jabatannya sebagai Presiden AS. Dalam hal ini, proses impeachment tidak harus berakhir pada berakhirnya masa jabatan seorang Presiden. | 123-137 |
