The most fundamental regulations on mining and coal industries are articulted in the Minerba Act of the previous regulation in Law Number 11 of 1967 concerning the Mining Basic Provisions. This regulation has amendedthe requirements of mining consession namely from Mining Authorization and Coal Contract of Work / Coal Contract of Work (KK / PK2PB) to become Mining Business License (IUP), Special Mining Business License (IUPK), and Mining Permit (IPR).This has had an impact on the existing mining contracts in Indonesia including PT Freeport's contract of work. This study discusses issues related to the concept of Contract of Work in Indonesia, legal position of Contract of Work (KK) of PT. Freeport Indonesia after the enactment of Law No. 4 of 2009, the necessity of transferring to Special Mining Business License (IUPK), and Legal Risks caused by the transfer of Contract of Work of PT. Freeport Indonesia to the Special Mining Business License (IUPK).
ABSTRAKBusiness judgment rule merupakan prinsip hukum dari sistem hukum common law yang bertujuan untuk memberikan perlindungan kepada direksi dalam menjalankan tugasnya sebagai pengambil keputusan dalam perseroan untuk tidak dipertanggungjawabkan secara hukum apabila keputusannya tersebut ternyata dapat merugikan perseroan. Paradigma baru investasi pemerintah dalam Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 63 Tahun 2019 tentang Investasi Pemerintah yang mengadopsi pengaturan prinsip business judgment rule dalam Undang Undang Nomor 40 tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas bertujuan untuk memitigasi risiko tindakan atau keputusan dalam investasi pemerintah yang dapat menimbulkan kerugian negara. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis urgensi penerapan prinsip business judgment rule dalam tata kelola investasi pemerintah berdasarkan PP Investasi Pemerintah. Menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif, ditemukan bahwa diterapkannya prinsip business judgment rule dalam kewenangan supervisi pada Komite Investasi Pemerintah (KIP) dan kewenangan operasional pada Operator Investasi Pemerintah (OIP) merupakan salah satu jawaban atas perlindungan hukum apa yang diatur dalam PP Investasi Pemerintah kepada KIP maupun OIP apabila terjadi penurunan nilai investasi untuk tidak dapat dikategorikan sebagai tindakan yang dapat menimbulkan kerugian negara, sepanjang KIP maupun OIP telah melakukan tugas dengan itikad baik, sesuai dan sejalan dengan ketentuan peraturan perundangan, dan telah memberikan banyak kemanfaatan bagi kepentingan umum.Kata kunci: business judgment rule; investasi pemerintah; kerugian negara. ABSTRACT The business judgment rule is a legal principle of the common law legal system which aims to provide protection to the board of directors in carrying out their duties as decision makers in the company from being legally responsible if the decision turns out to be detrimental to the company. The new paradigm of government investment in Government Regulation No. 63 of 2019 On Government Investment which adopts the principle of business judgment rule in Law No. 40 of 2007 On Limited Liability Companies aims to mitigate the risk of actions or decisions in government investments that can cause state losses. This study aims to analyze the urgency of applying the principle of business judgment rule in government investment governance based on Government Investment Regulations. Using the normative legal research method, it was found that the application of the principle of business judgment rule in the supervisory authority of the Government Investment Committee (KIP) and operational authority on the Government Investment Operator (OIP) is one of the answers to what legal protections are regulated in the Government Investment Regulation for KIP and OIP if there is a decline in the value of the investment cannot be categorized as an action that can cause state losses, as long as both KIP and OIP have performed their duties in good faith, in accordance with and in line with the provisions of laws and regulations, and have provided many benefits for the public interest.Keywords: business judgment rule; government investment; state losess
The auction for the execution of the mortgage right can be held by the creditor as the holder of the mortgage right for the defaulting debtor, but there are several important aspects in fulfilling a person who can be declared in default or not, this aims to avoid activities or conditions of illegal acts. This study discusses the consequences of an unlawful act in the auction of mortgage objects. In answering the problems in this research, a normative juridical approach is used with the type of analytical descriptive research and uses a qualitative data analysis method. The results of the analysis on the Kalianda District Court Decision No. 23/Pdt.G/2020/PN.Kla stated that there were circumstances that caused debts to be uncollectible immediately and all at once, paying attention to the unexpired term of the agreement is a determining aspect of whether a person can be declared in default and the value of the collateral that is greater than the debt causes the debtor to be in a position not yet eligible to be declared in default. An unlawful act is a determining aspect that can cancel the outcome of the execution of the mortgage due to violating the subjective rights of other people as the owner of the land object of the mortgage, because it violates the subjective rights of other people as the owner of the mortgage object land, causing losses to the debtor because the mortgage object is auctioned off or there is a causal relationship between the error and the loss suffered.
This journal discusses the implementation of the Disgorgement Fund as an effort to provide protection for investors in the Indonesian capital market as outlined in POJK No. 65/POJK.04/2020 concerning Return of Illegal Profits and Investor Loss Compensation Fund in the Capital Market Sector. The issues raised are how to implement the Disgorgement Fund itself in Indonesia and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of implementing the Disgorgement Fund in Indonesia in an effort to provide protection to investors in Indonesia. In its implementation, the Disgorgement Fund can calm investors while minimizing the crime rate in the Indonesian capital market so that the integrity of the capital market can be maintained, even though there are weaknesses such as parties subject to illegal return of profits that can harm investors and the difficulty of proving crimes in the capital market. But with the disgorgement fund system, that is effective, proportional, and preventive so that it can make a party choose not to commit a violation. Returning illegal profits as a remedial action is expected to prevent parties who commit violations from enjoying the profits they have obtained illegally, compensate for losses from victims of violations, contain corrective elements, and are expected to provide a deterrent effect.
This research focuses on Indonesian Law No. 7 of 2011 on Currency. Over the past ten years, information technology has developed so rapidly that it has been necessary to take another look at whether this law is still relevant now and in the near future. The research uses normative legal analysis methods with a conceptual approach, analytical approach, comparative approach across multiple countries, and case studies. The rapid development has left the law behind when addressing violations of the currency law. To eliminate ambiguity and hesitation in the implementation of the use of currency, this law must be amended. It is necessary to establishclear laws on digital money or electronic money (e-money), which is currently only regulated at the level of Bank Indonesia and Bank Indonesia Circular Letter. The use of foreign currency in border markets and places of foreign tourists, money in some places due to technological advances, and about the local wisdom of a society that has a history of using certain goods as currency. Things that develop and are a reality in society should be contained in statutes to settle the law.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.