Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Thesis ini membahas penyelesaian sengketa penanaman modal asing dibidang pertambangan minerba, berikut permasalahan-permasalahan yang muncul pada penyelesaian sengketa tersebut. Sebelumnya penyelesaian sengketa antara Pemerintah dengan penanam modal asing (investor) diselesaikan berdasarkan kesepakatan Kontrak Karya dan Perjanjian Karya Pengusahaan Pertambangan Batu Bara, dimana para pihak dapat menentukan forum penyelesaian sengketa yaitu salah satunya melalui arbitrase internasional. Pilihan penyelesaian sengketa melalui arbitrase internasional sejalan ketentuan Undang-Undang Nomor 25 Tahun 2007 tentang Penanaman Modal yang mengatur bahwa penyelesaian sengketa dibidang penanaman modal antara Pemerintah dengan penanam modal asing akan diselesaikan melalui arbitrase internasional yang harus di sepakati oleh para pihak. Namun saat ini ketentuan penyelesaian sengketa untuk penanaman modal asing di bidang minerba berdasarkan ketentuan Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan batubara tidak ditentukan secara jelas, undang-undang ini hanya menentukan bahwa setiap sengketa yang muncul dalam pelaksanaan IUP, IPR, atau IUPK diselesaikan melalui pengadilan dan arbitrase dalam negeri sesuai dengan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan, tidak ditentukan dengan jelas penyelesaian sengketa untuk penanam modal asing dan arbitrase internasional. Dalam pembahasan thesis ini banyak ditemukannya permasalahan terkait penyelesaian sengketa penanaman modal asing dibidang minerba yang meliputi permasalahan dalam peraturan perundang-undangan, sikap pemerintah mapun para pihak yang bersengketa dalam memandang sengketa penanaman modal asing dibidang minerba, belum seragamnya sikap hakim dalam melihat yurisdiksi arbitrase internasional dan keputusan arbitrase internasional. menyikapi permasalahan -permasalahan diatas, kegiatan penanaman modal asing dibidang minerba termasuk penyelesaian sengketa haruslah didukung oleh sistem hukum yang efektif yang didalamnya terdiri atas substansi, struktur dan budaya hukum yang saling mendukung satu sama lain. Selain itu, hukum akan mendorong datangnya modal asing dibidang minerba apabila dapat menciptakan predictability, stability, dan fairness.

---

ABSTRACTThis Thesis discusses Foreign Investment Dispute Resolution in Mineral and Coal Mining, including the problems arisen in dispute resolution there of. Previously, the dispute resolution between government and foreign investor (investor) is settled according to agreement of Contract of Work (KK) and Work Agreement of Coal Mining Production (PKP2B) where parties here of is able to determine the dispute resolution forum namely through international arbitration. The option of dispute resolution through international arbitration subject to the Law No. 25 2007 regarding Investment which govern the dispute resolution between government and investor is settled through international arbitration that must be conducted by the consent of both parties. At present, however, the rule of dispute resolution for the foreign investment of mineral and coal according to the Law No.4 Year 2009 regarding Mineral and Coal Mining does not stipulated clearly, this Law only determine that every dispute occur in implementation of IUP,IPR or IUPK is settled before the court or national arbitration according to the Law, it does not clearly stated for the foreign investment and international arbitration.In the Thesis, it will be more discussed about the problems regarding the foreign investment dispute resolution in mineral and coal that entail the issues in Law, government policy, the parties in dispute, and their perspective in foreign investment dispute resolution in mineral and coal issue, the different opinion of judges regarding the jurisdiction of international arbitration and the sentence of international arbitration. To look upon the issues mentioned above, the activities of foreign investment in mineral and coal including the dispute resolution must be supported by the effective legal system that comprise the substance, structure and legal culture which is sustained each other. Besides that, the law will support the foreign capital inflow in mineral and coal industry if it is able to create predictability, stability, dan fairness."

"Asas kebebasan berkontrak merupakan asas yang terpenting dalam kontrak dibidang penanaman modal asing, asas ini bersifat universal dan dianut oleh hukum perjanjian di semua negara pada umumnya. Sebagai konsekuensi adanya asas ini, para pihak dalam kontrak mendapat kebebasan untuk mengadakan pilihan yurisdiksi dan pilihan hukum didalam penyelesaian sengketa antara partner lokal dan partner asing maupun antara negara dengan investor asing. Tujuan dari penelitian ini untuk mengungkapkan kebenaran secara sistematis, metodologis dan konsistensi terhadap penyelesaian sengketa penajaman modal asing baik antara partner lokal dan partner asing maupun investor asing dengan Pemerintah. Penelitian ini melalui pendekatan secara yuridis normatif dengan spesifikasi deskriptif analitis. Bila terjadi sengketa antara partner lokal dan partner asing atau investor asing dengan Pemerintah, maka acuan pertama adalah hukum yang berlaku dan penyelesaian sengketa yang telah disepakati dipilih oleh para pihak baik menyangkut pilihan hukum maupun pilihan forum yang disepakati para pihak sebelumnya dalam perjanjian. Dalam penyelesaian sengketa berkenaan dengan penanaman modal asing di Indonesia terdapat kecenderungan bahwa pilihan forum penyelesaian sengketa yang telah disepakati dipilih sebagai forum penyelesaian sengketa adalah arbitrase. Arbitrase dapat merupakan sengketa yang efektif dalam penyelesaian sengketa penanaman modal bahkan Negara - Negara masyarakat hukum internasional telah membentuk arbitrase khusus mengenai penyelesaian sengketa penanaman modal yakni dengan adanya ICSID, UNCITRAL maupun BANI demikian juga terhadap pengakuan dan pelaksanaan putusan badan atau dewan arbitrase internasional yang dapat dieksekusi di Negara lain sesama peserta ratifikasi yang bersangkutan, misalnya Konvensi New York 1958."

"ABSTRAKICSID merupakan suatu lembaga arbitrase yangdidirikan khusus untuk menyelesaikan sengketa penanamanmodal asing yang terjadi antara negara dengan warga negaralain anggota peserta konvensi. Berkaitan dengan haltersebut perlu ditelaah mengenai cara apa yang palingtepat untuk menyelesaikan sengketa penanaman modal asing,bagaimana peranan ICSID sebagai salah satu lembagaalternatif penyelesaian sengketa penanaman modal asingditinjau dari sudut HPI dan bagaimana keterkaitan antaraarbitrase dengan prinsip pilihan hukum serta bagaimanaperan pemerintah dalam melaksanakan putusan ICSID.Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan menggunakan metodepenelitian deskriptif analitik yaitu menggambarkan danmenganalisa mengenai pelaksanaan penyelesaian sengketapenanaman modal asing menurut ketentuan peraturanperundang-undangan. Berdasarkan hal tersebut dapatdisimpulkan bahwa cara yang paling tepat untukmenyelesaikan sengketa penanaman modal asing adalah melaluilembaga arbitrase, khususnya ICSID yang merupakan suatulembaga khusus yang dibentuk untuk menyelesaikan sengketa penanaman modal asing. Dalam menyelesaikan sengketa, ICSIDhanya menerima sengketa yang terjadi antara negara denganwarga negara lain. Hukum yang dipergunakan adalah hukumyang dipilih oleh para pihak. Apabila tidak terdapatpilihan hukum maka yang digunakan adalah hukum host State,jika masih kurang maka akan ditambah dengan prinsip-prinsiphukum internasional. Selain itu, arbiter juga harusmemperhatikan klausula pilihan forum untuk menentukan forumapa yang akan dipergunakan. Peranan pemerintah dalampelaksanaan putusan ICSID adalah dengan membuat undang -undang tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif PenyelesaianSengketa No. 30 Tahun 1999."

"[ABSTRAKTesis ini mengkaji putusan ICSID dalam sengketa antara Rafat Ali Rizvi melawan Republik Indonesia yang diputus berdasarkan Bilateral Investment Treaty (?BIT?) antara negara Indonesia dan negara Inggris, Agreement between the Government of United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, yang ditandatangani pada tanggal 27 April 1976 dan mulai berlaku tanggal 24 Maret 1977. Permasalahan utama yang menjadi fokus penelitian ini adalah (i) apakah yang menjadi pokok sengketa antara Rafat Ali Rizvi melawan Republik Indonesia dan (ii) bagaimana pendapat majelis arbitrase ICSID yang memeriksa dan mengadili perkara tersebut dikaitkan dengan penafsiran atas ketentuan BIT dalam sengketa penanaman modal. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode penelitian hukum normatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pokok sengketa yang terjadi adalah masalah proses dan prosedur masuknya penanaman modal asing (admission process) yang harus dilalui investor berdasarkan BIT. Proses tersebut menentukan legalitas penanaman modal yang dilakukan. Tidak terpenuhinya admission process tersebut menjadikan Majelis Arbitrase ICSID tidak memiliki yurisdiksi untuk memeriksa dan mengadili sengketa tersebut sehingga pokok perkara tidak dapat diperiksa. Penafsiran atas ketentuan-ketentuan dalam BIT utamanya menggunakan Pasal 31 ayat (1) Konvensi Wina 1969 tentang Hukum Perjanjian, khususnya penafsiran berdasarkan makna biasa dari rumusan ketentuan BIT. Kajian tesis ini menyimpulkan bahwa penanaman modal yang dilakukan Penggugat tidak memenuhi ketentuan Pasal 2 ayat (1) BIT mengenai admission process sehingga Majelis Arbitrase menyatakan tidak memiliki yurisdiksi untuk memeriksa perkara tersebut. Majelis Arbitrase menafsirkan frasa ?granted admission in accordance with? dalam ketentuan Pasal 2 ayat (1) BIT antara Indonesia dan Inggris berdasarkan Konvensi Wina 1969 tentang hukum perjanjian khususnya Pasal 31 ayat (1). Penggunaan aturan penafsiran tersebut juga ditemukan dalam putusan-putusan ICSID lainnya yang menafsrikan ketentuan BIT yang serupa dengan ketentuan BIT antara Indonesia dan Inggris.

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis analyzes the decision of ICSID tribunal in the case between Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia based on Bilateral Investment Treaty (?BIT?) between Indonesia and United Kingdom, Agreement between the Government of United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, signed on 27 April 1976 and entered into force on 24 March 1977. The research questions of this thesis are (i) what is the subject matter of the case between Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia; (ii) how is the opinion of the Tribunal in examining and adjudicating the case related to the interpretation of BIT provisions in investment disputes. The method used in analyzing the problems is normative legal research method. Research result shows that the subject matter of the case is the admission process of foreign investment. There is admission process that should be followed based on BIT in that process which determines the legality of the investment. This legality requirement is related to ICSID jurisdiction. If these processes are unfulfilled, the ICSID tribunal will not have jurisdiction on the case. Thus, the merit of the case will not be examined. The rule of interpretation used is mainly the provision of Article 31 (1) of the 1969 Vienna Covention on the Law of Treaty especially interpretation based on the ordinary meaning of the BIT provision. This study concludes that the Claimant?s investment does not fulfil the provision of Article 2 (1) of BIT between Indonesia and United Kingdom concerning the admission process that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction on the case. The Tribunal inbterprets the phrase ?granted admission in accordance with? in the provision of Article 2 (1) of the BIT based on the 1969 Vienna Convension on the Law of Treaty especially Article 31 (1) concerning interpretation based on the ordinary meaning of the BIT provision. The use of this rule of interpretation is also found in other ICSID decisions which interpret similar phrase of BIT as that in the BIT between Indonesia and United Kingdom.;This thesis analyzes the decision of ICSID tribunal in the case between Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia based on Bilateral Investment Treaty (?BIT?) between Indonesia and United Kingdom, Agreement between the Government of United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, signed on 27 April 1976 and entered into force on 24 March 1977. The research questions of this thesis are (i) what is the subject matter of the case between Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia; (ii) how is the opinion of the Tribunal in examining and adjudicating the case related to the interpretation of BIT provisions in investment disputes. The method used in analyzing the problems is normative legal research method. Research result shows that the subject matter of the case is the admission process of foreign investment. There is admission process that should be followed based on BIT in that process which determines the legality of the investment. This legality requirement is related to ICSID jurisdiction. If these processes are unfulfilled, the ICSID tribunal will not have jurisdiction on the case. Thus, the merit of the case will not be examined. The rule of interpretation used is mainly the provision of Article 31 (1) of the 1969 Vienna Covention on the Law of Treaty especially interpretation based on the ordinary meaning of the BIT provision. This study concludes that the Claimant?s investment does not fulfil the provision of Article 2 (1) of BIT between Indonesia and United Kingdom concerning the admission process that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction on the case. The Tribunal inbterprets the phrase ?granted admission in accordance with? in the provision of Article 2 (1) of the BIT based on the 1969 Vienna Convension on the Law of Treaty especially Article 31 (1) concerning interpretation based on the ordinary meaning of the BIT provision. The use of this rule of interpretation is also found in other ICSID decisions which interpret similar phrase of BIT as that in the BIT between Indonesia and United Kingdom.;This thesis analyzes the decision of ICSID tribunal in the case between Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia based on Bilateral Investment Treaty (?BIT?) between Indonesia and United Kingdom, Agreement between the Government of United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, signed on 27 April 1976 and entered into force on 24 March 1977. The research questions of this thesis are (i) what is the subject matter of the case between Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia; (ii) how is the opinion of the Tribunal in examining and adjudicating the case related to the interpretation of BIT provisions in investment disputes. The method used in analyzing the problems is normative legal research method. Research result shows that the subject matter of the case is the admission process of foreign investment. There is admission process that should be followed based on BIT in that process which determines the legality of the investment. This legality requirement is related to ICSID jurisdiction. If these processes are unfulfilled, the ICSID tribunal will not have jurisdiction on the case. Thus, the merit of the case will not be examined. The rule of interpretation used is mainly the provision of Article 31 (1) of the 1969 Vienna Covention on the Law of Treaty especially interpretation based on the ordinary meaning of the BIT provision. This study concludes that the Claimant?s investment does not fulfil the provision of Article 2 (1) of BIT between Indonesia and United Kingdom concerning the admission process that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction on the case. The Tribunal inbterprets the phrase ?granted admission in accordance with? in the provision of Article 2 (1) of the BIT based on the 1969 Vienna Convension on the Law of Treaty especially Article 31 (1) concerning interpretation based on the ordinary meaning of the BIT provision. The use of this rule of interpretation is also found in other ICSID decisions which interpret similar phrase of BIT as that in the BIT between Indonesia and United Kingdom.;This thesis analyzes the decision of ICSID tribunal in the case between Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia based on Bilateral Investment Treaty (?BIT?) between Indonesia and United Kingdom, Agreement between the Government of United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, signed on 27 April 1976 and entered into force on 24 March 1977. The research questions of this thesis are (i) what is the subject matter of the case between Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia; (ii) how is the opinion of the Tribunal in examining and adjudicating the case related to the interpretation of BIT provisions in investment disputes. The method used in analyzing the problems is normative legal research method. Research result shows that the subject matter of the case is the admission process of foreign investment. There is admission process that should be followed based on BIT in that process which determines the legality of the investment. This legality requirement is related to ICSID jurisdiction. If these processes are unfulfilled, the ICSID tribunal will not have jurisdiction on the case. Thus, the merit of the case will not be examined. The rule of interpretation used is mainly the provision of Article 31 (1) of the 1969 Vienna Covention on the Law of Treaty especially interpretation based on the ordinary meaning of the BIT provision. This study concludes that the Claimant?s investment does not fulfil the provision of Article 2 (1) of BIT between Indonesia and United Kingdom concerning the admission process that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction on the case. The Tribunal inbterprets the phrase ?granted admission in accordance with? in the provision of Article 2 (1) of the BIT based on the 1969 Vienna Convension on the Law of Treaty especially Article 31 (1) concerning interpretation based on the ordinary meaning of the BIT provision. The use of this rule of interpretation is also found in other ICSID decisions which interpret similar phrase of BIT as that in the BIT between Indonesia and United Kingdom., This thesis analyzes the decision of ICSID tribunal in the case between Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia based on Bilateral Investment Treaty (“BIT”) between Indonesia and United Kingdom, Agreement between the Government of United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia for the Promotion and Protection of Investments, signed on 27 April 1976 and entered into force on 24 March 1977. The research questions of this thesis are (i) what is the subject matter of the case between Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia; (ii) how is the opinion of the Tribunal in examining and adjudicating the case related to the interpretation of BIT provisions in investment disputes. The method used in analyzing the problems is normative legal research method. Research result shows that the subject matter of the case is the admission process of foreign investment. There is admission process that should be followed based on BIT in that process which determines the legality of the investment. This legality requirement is related to ICSID jurisdiction. If these processes are unfulfilled, the ICSID tribunal will not have jurisdiction on the case. Thus, the merit of the case will not be examined. The rule of interpretation used is mainly the provision of Article 31 (1) of the 1969 Vienna Covention on the Law of Treaty especially interpretation based on the ordinary meaning of the BIT provision. This study concludes that the Claimant’s investment does not fulfil the provision of Article 2 (1) of BIT between Indonesia and United Kingdom concerning the admission process that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction on the case. The Tribunal inbterprets the phrase “granted admission in accordance with” in the provision of Article 2 (1) of the BIT based on the 1969 Vienna Convension on the Law of Treaty especially Article 31 (1) concerning interpretation based on the ordinary meaning of the BIT provision. The use of this rule of interpretation is also found in other ICSID decisions which interpret similar phrase of BIT as that in the BIT between Indonesia and United Kingdom.]"

"Ada hubungan erat antara hukum penanaman modal dan hukum perdagangan internasional. Isi hukum penanaman modal berpijak pada hukum domestik negara tuan rumah, sementara isi hukum perdagangan internasional tunduk pada perjanjian internasional yang diratifikasi masing-masing negara yang menjadi anggota organisasi perdagangan internasional...."

"ABSTRACTSaat ini telah lahir sistem alternatif penyelesaian sengketa investasi yaitu Investment Court System yang unggul dalam beberapa aspek seperti kepastian hukum, konsistensi, transparansi dan lain sebagainya. Skripsi ini mengambil tiga rumusan masalah yaitu untuk mengetahui apa itu Investment Court System, apa keunggulan dan kelemahan dari gagasan Investment Court System, dan untuk mengkaji penerapan gagasan Investment Court System ini pada hukum Indonesia.Metode penelitian skripsi ini adalah yuridis-normatif mengacu kepada norma hukum yang terdapat dalam peraturan perundang-undangan dan norma-norma lain yang berlaku dan mengikat di masyarakat. Perolehan data dilakukan melalui penelitian kepustakaan yakni melalui pengumpulan data sekunder. Kesimpulan dari skripsi ini adalah bahwa Investment Court System memiliki beberapa keunggulan dibandingkan dengan sistem arbitrase dan mampu melengkapi mekanisme arbitrase. Kesiapan hukum Indonesia dalam penerapan gagasanini dapat dikatakan belum siap karena belum memiliki infrastruktur hukum untuk menerapkannya secara paripurna. Diperlukan penyesuaian UU Penanaman Modal, khususnya dalam ketentuan penyelesaian sengketa penanaman modal. Saran Penulis untuk Pemerintah Indonesia adalah perlu kembali mengkaji mengenai sistem penyelesaian sengketa investasi asing yang selama ini diterapkan dalam UU Penanaman Modal dan mempertimbangkan alternatif baru, yaitu Investment Court System. Saran Penulis bagi kalangan akademisi Indonesia adalah untuk mengkaji lebih lanjut mengenai gagasan Investment Court System ini dan bagaimana penerapannya.

---

ABSTRACTAn alternative system of investment dispute resolution has been born, namely Investment Court System that excels in several aspects such as legal-certainty, consistency, transparency and so on. This thesis takes three problems, namely to find out what Investment Court System is, what are the advantages and disadvantages of the Investment Court System, and the application of Investment Court System to Indonesian law. This thesis research method is juridical-normative refers to legal norms and other norms that bind in the community. Data acquisition is done through library research which is through secondary data collection. The thesis conclusion is that the Investment Court System has several advantages and able to complete the arbitration mechanism. It can be said that Indonesia is not ready to implement the idea because it does not yet have a legal infrastructure for it. Adjustments of law are needed, especially in terms of investment dispute resolution provisions. The authors suggestion for the Indonesian Government is to review the system of investment disputes that have been implemented in the Investment Law and consider an alternative, Investment Court System. The authors suggestion for Indonesian academics is to study more about this Investment Court System idea and how it is implemented."

"ABSTRAKDalam perjanjian penanaman modal asing, salah satu bentuk perlakuan yang wajib diberikan oleh negara penerima modal kepada penanam modal asing adalah perlakuan yang adil dan wajar yang dikenal dengan istilah Fair and Equitable Treatment. Saat ini, salah satu unsur standar Fair and Equitable Treatment yaitu legitimate expectations, kerap digunakan sebagai dasar gugatan oleh penanam modal asing terhadap negara penerima modal dalam sengketa penanaman modal asing. Dalam skripsi ini dianalisis putusan-putusan ICSID yang telah mempertimbangkan legitimate expectations. Hasil penelitian ini menjelaskan doktrin legitimate expectations dan pendekatan-pendekatan yang digunakan oleh Dewan Arbiter ICSID dalam menginterpretasikan doktrin legitimate expectations dalam sengketa penanaman modal asing.

---

ABSTRACTn international investment agreements, one form of the treatments that shall be given by the host state to foreign investors is fair and equitable treatment. Nowadays, one of the elements of fair and equitable treatment, namely legitimate expectations, is oftenly used by foreign investors as a claim basis against the host state in foreign investment disputes. This thesis analyzed ICSID arbitration awards that have put legitimate expectations into consideration. The result of this research explains doctrine of legitimate expectations and the approaches used by the ICSID arbitration tribunals to interpret it in foreign investment disputes.;;"