Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai proses penjatuhan sanksi berupa penghentian sementara perdagangan saham suspensi saham kepada PT. Sekawan Intipratama Tbk. Bursa Efek Indonesia telah melakukan suspensi saham sejak November 2015, namun berdasarkan hasil wawancara dengan divisi pengawasan transaksi Bursa Efek Indonesia, diketahui bahwa alasan yang melatarbelakangi dilakukannya suspensi tidak sesuai dengan peraturan di bidang pasar modal. Hal ini menunjukan masih kurang jelasnya proses penjatuhan suspensi saham yang tidak memberikan perlindungan kepada emiten dan investor Padahal tujuan didirikannya Bursa Efek Indonesia adalah untuk menyelenggarakan perdagangan Efek yang teratur, wajar, dan efisien. Oleh karena itu, sangatlah diperlukan pengaturan yang lebih jelas dan rinci perihal suspensi perdagangan saham yang diharapkan dapat memberikan perlindungan terhadap investor.

---

The main issue of this thesis is about how Indonesia Stock Exchange, also known as IDX, suspend PT. Sekawan Intipratama Tbk from dealing its securities. IDX already suspended PT. Sekawan Intipratama Tbk since November 2015, but according to the interview with transaction supervision division of IDX's, it is clearly shows that the reason behind the suspension is still unclear and not regulated by the law yet. Whereas according to the law, IDX shall be founded for the purpose of organizing an orderly, fair and efficient trading market for securities. That's why it is necessary to regulate concerning stock trades suspension which as expected can protect the shareholders and listed companies in the future. "

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai instrument pasar modal berupa RepurchaseAgreement saham yang merupakan jual beli saham dengan mekanisme pembeliankembali ketika jatuh tempo dengan harga tertentu. Perusahaan melakukantransaksi repo dengan alasan membutuhkan dana dengan waktu yang cepat danmudah, namun risiko yang terdapat pada transaksi repo ini juga cukup besar salahsatu risiko nya adalah default oleh salah satu pihak dalam perjanjian Repo.Keadaan default dalam Repo dapat dipengaruhi oleh beberapa hal salah satunyadipengaruhi oleh tindakan manipulasi pasar yang dilarang oleh UUPM. Risikodefault ini dapat menyebabkan keadaan wanprestasi. Dalam kurun waktu yanglalu pasar modal Indonesia dilanda krisis yang menyebabkan penurunan hargasaham bagi perusahaan yang melakukan transaksi Repo harus menanggung risikountuk membayar kekurangan dana atau melakukan top up saham karena sahamyang menjadi underlying transaksi mengalami penurunan nilai akibat krisisfinansial tersebut. Penurunan nilai saham tersebut menyebabkan turunnya rasiojaminan saham yang menjadi underlying perjanjian Repo tersebut, mekanisme topup yang terdapat pada Repo digunkan untuk menutupi turunnya rasio jaminansaham. Namun apabila mekanisme top up tidak dapat dilakuan oleh penjual repomaka yang terjadi adalah wanprestasi terhadap perjanjian repo. Pada tesis inidibahas studi kasus pada saham SIAP yang default dalam transaksi Repo dimanadefault nya transaksi Repo SIAP dipengaruhi oleh indikasi transaksi semu yangdilakukan pihak penjual Repo SIAP.

---

This thesis discusses the Share Repurchase Agreement, a capital market

instrument which comprises the buying and selling of shares arranged with a

repurchase mechanism at a specified price by the time the repurchase is due.

Companies enter into repurchase agreements (also known as repo transactions) to

quickly and easily acquire funds. However, the risk of default by one of the

parties of a repo transaction is also quite significant to the transaction. The state of

default within a repo transaction may be influenced by several circumstances, one

of which is the action of market manipulation prohibited by Law Number 8 of

1995 concerning the Capital Market. This risk of default may cause the state of a

breach of the repurchase agreement. During a certain period ago, the Indonesian

capital market was struck by a crisis that led to a decrease in the share prices of

companies that conducted repo transactions. Those companies had to bear the

risks of either paying the shortage of funds or to conduct the top-up of shares, for

the reason that the shares which constituted the underlying assets of the

transactions were devalued as a result of the financial crisis. This decline in share

value caused the decline in the ration of the share collateral as the underlying asset

of the repo transaction. The top-up mechanism contained in the repo transaction is

used to cover the decline in the ration of share collateral. However, if the top-up

mechanism cannot be conducted by the seller of the repo transaction, then a

breach of the repurchase agreement has emerged. This thesis conducts a case

study on the shares of SIAP which defaulted in its repo transaction. Its default is

influenced by an indication of false transactions carried out by the seller of the

SIAP repo."

"Pengungkapan beneficial owner merupakan hal yang penting dilakukan di pasar modal. Pengungkapan beneficial owner berguna untuk mencegah kejahatan pasar modal maupun kejahatan yang dilakukan melalui pasar modal seperti tindak pidana pencucian uang. Salah satu kejahatan pasar modal yang dapat terjadi akibat tidak dilakukannya pengungkapan beneficial owner adalah manipulasi pasar, salah satunya wash sales. Wash sales merupakan transaksi yang terjadi antara pihak pembeli dan penjual yang tidak menimbulkan perubahan beneficial owner atas saham tersebut. Salah satu kasus wash sales yang menjadi perhatian publik terjadi pada saham PT Sekawan Intipratama Tbk (SIAP). Penyebab utama dari terjadinya peristiwa tersebut adalah tidak dilaksanakannya prinsip Know Your Customer dengan baik pada saat pembukaan rekening efek yang mengakibatkan tidak terungkapnya beneficial owner rekening tersebut sehingga terjadi transaksi jual beli saham SIAP antara rekening yang memiliki beneficial owner yang sama. Oleh karena itu, skripsi ini akan membahas dan menganalisis apakah pengaturan pengungkapan beneficial owner di Indonesia telah mampu untuk mencegah terjadinya manipulasi pasar. Analisis tersebut akan dilakukan dengan membandingkan peraturan pengungkapan beneficial owner saat ini dan pada peraturan yang berlaku saat terjadinya manipulasi pasar atas saham SIAP. Penulis juga akan membandingkan pengaturan pengungkapan beneficial owner di Indonesia dan Inggris. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis-normatif yang didukung oleh studi kepustakaan dan wawancara narasumber untuk mengumpulkan data. Adapun kesimpulan dari skripsi ini adalah terdapat perkembangan yang signifikan dalam pengaturan pengungkapan beneficial owner di pasar modal Indonesia dalam rangka pencegahan manipulasi pasar sejak diterbitkannya Peraturan Presiden Nomor 13 Tahun 2018. Indonesia juga sudah mengatur pengungkapan beneficial owner sebagaimana yang diatur oleh Inggris. Saran yang diberikan oleh penulis adalah untuk mengatur mengenai pengungkapan beneficial owner terhadap perusahaan asing yang ada di Indonesia serta meningkatkan penerapan sanksi bagi pihak yang melanggar ketentuan pengungkapan beneficial owner.

---

The disclosure of beneficial ownership is an essential practice in the capital market. Disclosing beneficial ownership is useful in preventing capital market crimes and crimes committed through the capital market, such as money laundering crimes. One of the capital market crimes that can occur due to the lack of disclosure of beneficial ownership is market manipulation, such as wash sales. Wash sales involve transactions between buyers and sellers that do not change the beneficial owner of the shares. One notable case of wash sales that drew public attention occurred with the stock of PT Sekawan Intipratama Tbk (SIAP). The main cause of this occurrence was the lack of proper implementation of the Know Your Customer principle during the opening of securities accounts, resulting in the undisclosed beneficial owner of the account and consequently leading to the trading of SIAP shares between accounts sharing the same beneficial owner. Therefore, this thesis will discuss and analyse whether the regulation of beneficial ownership disclosure in Indonesia has been effective in preventing market manipulation. The analysis will compare the current regulations on beneficial ownership disclosure with those in place at the time of the market manipulation involving SIAP shares. The author will also compare the regulations on beneficial ownership disclosure between Indonesia and the United Kingdom. The research method utilized is a juridical-normative approach supported by literature studies and interviews with sources to gather data. The conclusion drawn from this thesis is that there has been significant progress in regulating beneficial ownership disclosure in the Indonesian capital market since the issuance of Presidential Regulation Number 13 of 2018. Indonesia has also established beneficial ownership disclosure regulations similar to those in the United Kingdom. The author suggests regulating the disclosure of beneficial ownership concerning foreign companies in Indonesia and enhancing the enforcement of sanctions against parties violating beneficial ownership disclosure provisions.

"

"Penggabungan Usaha PT Bank BRISyariah Tbk (BRIS) dengan PT Bank Syariah Mandiri (BSM) dan PT Bank BNI Syariah (BNIS) dapat dikategorikan sebagai aksi backdoor listing BSM dengan mekanisme penggabungan terbalik (reverse merger), dengan kondisi seluruh bank yang melakukan transaksi merupakan pihak terafiliasi. Penelitian ini memfokuskan analisis terhadap Pertama, tidak dilakukannya RUPS Independen BRIS dalam pengambilan keputusan penggabungan usaha; dan Kedua, pemenuhan hak menilai harga saham (appraisal right) oleh BRIS. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian doktrinal serta bertipologi deskripsis analitis. Dari hasil penelitian diketahui seharusnya RUPS dalam rangka menyetujui Penggabungan Usaha BRIS dilaksanakan dengan tata cara RUPS Independen (kecuali terdapat penetapan Kementerian BUMN bahwa penggabungan adalah dalam rangka restrukturisasi -yang tidak di temukan dalam penjelasan RUPS-). BRIS juga sudah melaksanakan penyelesaian hak menilai harga saham (appraisal right) terhadap pemegang saham yang tidak setuju dengan penggabungan, namun jika dibandingkan dengan pelaksanaan hak yang sama pada aksi korporasi PT Indosat Tbk, PT Telkom (Persero) Tbk, dan PT Bank OCBC NISP Tbk, ditemukan perbedaan dalam penggunaan referensi/dasar harga pembelian, periode pembelian kembali saham, tempo pembayaran, dan Pihak yang melakukan pembelian kembali. Oleh sebab itu perbedaan perlakuan yang diterapkan Perusahaan Terbuka, meski tidak bertentangan dengan aturan terkait, namun dapat menimbulkan ketidakadilan bagi pemegang saham minoritas.

---

The merger of BRIS with BSM and BNIS can be categorized as a backdoor listing action of BSM with a reverse merger mechanism, and all affiliated parties. This study focuses on the absence of the BRIS Independent GMS in making business merger decisions; and the fulfillment of the appraisal right by BRIS. This study uses doctrinal research methods. From the results of the research, it is known that the GMS to approve the BRIS Merger shall be Independent GMS. BRIS has also carried out the settlement of the appraisal right for shareholders who do not agree with the merger, but when compared to the exercise of the same rights in the corporate action of PT Indosat Tbk, PT Telkom (Persero) Tbk, and PT Bank OCBC NISP Tbk, there are differences in the use of reference/basis for the purchase price, share repurchase period, payment tempo, etc. and the Party that makes the repurchase. Therefore, the difference in treatment applied by Public Companies, although not contrary to related rules, can cause injustice to minority shareholders."

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai bagaimana bentuk perlidungan yang diberikan bagi Pemegang saham public/minoritas di pasar modal. Mengingat Pasar modal yang esensinya dapat memberikan kontribusi yang besar dalam bidang ekonomi, maka diperlukan dukungan sarana hukum yakni sistem perdagangan efek yang lebih efisien dan transparan, yang mengatur seluruh kegiatan pasar modal serta memberi perlindungan terhadap kepentingan pemodal, dan dengan menerapkan pelaksanaan prinsip keterbukaan sehingga investor dan pelaku bursa lainnya mempunyai informasi yang cukup dan akurat untuk pengambilan keputusan, disamping itu perlu adanya dukungan dari lembaga-lembaga terkait. Penerapan prinsip keterbukaan di pasar modal ini sangat penting dalam upaya pencegahan terjadinya pelanggaran dan kejahatan di pasar modal yang mana bentuk kejahatan yang akan khusus di bicarakan dalam penulisan skripsi ini adalah bentuk kejahatan manipulasi. Ada keterkaitan erat terjadinya kejahatan manipulasi pasar karena tidak disiplin pelaku pasar modal melaksanakan prinsip keterbukaan untuk melindungi kepentingan investor. Upaya yang diwujudkan demi melindungi kepentingan pemilik modal dan agar terciptanya suasana perdagangan efek yang efisien dan transparan di Pasar Modal Indonesia, maka diberlakukan ketentuan mengenai mekanisme perdagangan efek di Pasar Modal Indonesia dalam Undang-Undang No.8 Tahun 1995 tentang Pasar Modal. Dalam hal upaya perlindungan mengenai ketentuan ini, maka dibentuk pula suatu lembaga resmi Otoritas Jasa Keuangan yang menggantikan BAPEPAM-LK sebagai penegak hukum dalam pasar modal. Pasar Modal mengharuskan setiap pihak, yakni pihak penyelenggara pasar modal, investor, lembaga dan profesi penunjang pasar modal, terutama emiten untuk melaksanakan prinsip keterbukaan dan perlindungan investor. Pengaturan mengenai mekanisme perdagangan efek pasar modal sebagaimana dalam Undang-Undang No. 8 tahun 1995 tentang Pasar Modal yang dirasa sudah cukup untuk melindungi investor di Pasar Modal Indonesia. Namun, bila disandingkan dengan pengaturan mengenai manipulasi pasar yang kurang terperinci dirasa kurang sempurna terlebih lagi pembuktian dalam kasus manipulasi ini agak rumit pembuktiannya. Penulisan ini menggunakan metode pendekatan Yuridis Normatif, yaitu menjabarkan dan menganalisis permasalahan dari sudut pandang atau menurut ketentuan atau perundang-undangan yang berlaku dan juga pandangan menurut ahli-ahli hukum lainnya(doktrinal) atau disebut juga penelitian kepustakaan.

---

This thesis describes how the protection afforded to public / minority shareholders in the capital market. That its essence can give great contribution in the field of Economics, then the necessary means of legal support i.e. system trading more efficient and transparent, that set the whole capital market activities as well as giving protection to the interests of financiers, and by applying the implementation of the principle of transparency so that investors and other market participants get enough information and accurate for decision-making, the need for support from the institutions concerned. The application of the principle of transparency in the stock market is very important in prevention efforts violations and crimes in the capital market which is a form of crime that will specifically talked about in this thesis writing is a form of manipulation of the crime. There is a close relation of the crime of market manipulation because it does not disciplined capital market participants carry out the principle of transparency in order to protect the interests of investors. Efforts are realized in order to protect the interests of the investors and that the creation of an efficient securities trading atmosphere and transparent capital market in Indonesia, then enacted the provisions regarding securities trading mechanisms in the Indonesia capital market law No. 8 year 1995 regarding capital market. In terms of protective measures regarding this provision, then formed an official institution also the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan(OJK) which replaced the BAPEPAM-LK as law enforcement in the capital markets. The capital market requires each party, i.e. capital market operators, investors, institutions and capital market supporting professional, especially issuers to implement the principle of transparency and the protection of investors. Arrangements regarding the effect of capital market trading mechanisms as in law No. 8 year 1995 regarding capital market where enough is enough to protect investors in the Indonesia capital market. However, when juxtaposed with the less detail arrangements regarding market manipulation is felt less than perfect what's more proof in the case of this manipulation rather complicated to be evidenced. The writing of this Juridical Normative approach using the method, that lays out and analyze the problem from the point of view or according to the applicable legislation or provisions, and also the views according to other legal experts (doctrinal) or also known as research libraries."

"ABSTRAKSkripsi ini adalah penelitian hukum dengan pendekatan yuridis normatif yangbersifat deskriptif dan perspektif analisis. Dalam skripsi ini membahas mengenaipelanggaran yang dilakukan oleh PT Katarina Utama Tbk sebagai emiten terkaitprinsip keterbukaan di dalam Undang-Undang Pasar Modal dan peraturan lainnya.Selain itu skripsi ini membahas pelanggaran yang dilakukan oleh emiten sehinggamendapatkan sanksi penghentian sementara perdagangan (suspensi) saham terkaitdengan prinsip keterbukaan informasi yang tidak dilakukan oleh emiten sebagaikewajibannya sehingga dapat mengakibatkan penghapusan pencatatan sahamperusahaan yang mempunyai dampak terhadap investor. Skripsi ini membahas isuhukum mengenai pemberian dan pencabutan sanksi suspensi saham terhadapemiten berdasarkan hukum di Indonesia. Sebagai perbandingan, skripsi inimenjelaskan tindakan yang dilakukan oleh The Financial Industry RegulatoryAuthority (FINRA) terkait dengan suspensi saham di Amerika Serikat

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis is the study of law using anormative juridical approach in descriptive

and analytical perspectives. This thesis mainly discusses about the breach of full

disclosure by PT Katarina Utama Tbk as the issuer under Indonesia capital market

laws and regulations. In addition, this thesis also discusses about the disciplinary

actions taken by the authority in the form of stock suspension against the shares of

PT Katarina Utama Tbk which have impacts to the investors. This thesis describes

about regulatory issues of stock suspension under Indonesia regulations to the

authority in granting and revoking stock suspension. As a comparison, this thesis

describes the actions taken by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority

(FINRA) in relation to stock suspension in United States of America."

"Sebuah penantian panjang bagi PT Aqua Golden Mississippi Tbk. untuk sampai pada akhirnya berhasil mendapatkan persetujuan pemegang saham minoritas untuk go private. Pemegang saham dalam perusahaan terbuka merupakan pihak yang memiliki kedudukan penting dalam pengambilan keputusan aksi korporasi perusahaan. Pemegang saham memiliki hak dan kewajiban yang harus dipenuhi dalam menjalankan aksi korporasi tersebut sesuai dengan porsinya sebagai pemegang saham mayoritas dan pemegang saham minoritas. Dalam aksi korporasi go private, tindakan ini hanya dapat dilakukan dengan persetujuan pemegang saham minoritas melalui Rapat Umum Pemegang Saham Luar Biasa. Persyaratan tersebut diberikan untuk melindungi kepentingan pemegang saham minoritas.Dalam tindakan go private, pemegang saham mayoritas hanya diberikan wewenang untuk memberikan usulan dan melaksanakan kewajiban sesuai dengan ketentuan hukum pasar modal. Peraturan mengenai go private secara spesifik belum ditetapkan oleh Bapepam-LK, namun bertindak sebagai pengawas dan regulator di bidang pasar modal, Bapepam-LK dapat mengeluarkan kebijakan berupa Surat Bapepam-LK perihal Rencana Go Private. Selain surat tersebut, proses go private dilakukan sesuai dengan Peraturan Bapepam Nomor IX.E.1 tentang Benturan Transaksi Kepentingan Tertentu, Peraturan Bapepam Nomor IX.F.1 tentang Penawaran Tender.

---

It is a long wait for PT Aqua Golden Mississippi Tbk. to finally managed to get the approval of minority shareholders to go private. Shareholders in public companies is a party that has an important position in the company's corporate decision-making action. The shareholders have the rights and obligations that must be met in carrying out corporate action in accordance with it's portion as a majority shareholder and minority shareholders. In a corporate action, go private can only be done with the approval of minority shareholders through the Extraordinary General Meeting of Shareholders. These requirements are given to protect the interests of minority shareholders. In this go private action, the majority shareholders of a company only authorized to propose and carry out duties in accordance with the provisions of capital market law. Specific regulations for Go Private have not been determined by Bapepam-LK yet, but act as supervisors and regulators in the capital market, Bapepam-LK may issue a policy letter concerning to the plan of going private of a company. In addition to the letter, go private process conducted in accordance with Bapepam Rule Number IX.E.1 on Conflicts of Interest of Certain Transactions and Bapepam Rule No. IX.F.1 about the Tender Offer."

"Pailitnya suatu perusahaan dalam dunia usaha dewasa ini sudah tergolong merupakan suatu peristiwa yang lumrah dan sering terjadi. Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang yang berlaku di Indonesia sampai saat ini memberikan suatu alternatif bagi para kreditor untuk mengajukan permohonan pailit atas suatu perusahaan yang menjadi debitornya. Salah satu pihak yang dapat berkedudukan menjadi debitor dan mengalami permohonan pailit adalah emiten atau perusahaan publik. Apabila suatu emiten mengalami pailit maka terdapat pihak yang sangat dirugikan atas kondisi tersebut, yaitu para investor publik. Investor publik menjadi pihak yang sangat dirugikan karena dengan pailitnya emiten tempatnya berinvestasi maka para investor publik tersebut tidak dapat menjual saham-saham yang dimilikinya lagi di dalam emiten tersebut. Sementara itu posisinya yang merupakan pemegang saham dalam emiten terkait menjadikannya terhitung turut serta sebagai debitor pula. Oleh karena itulah maka investor publik berada di urutan paling akhir setelah kreditor konkuren di dalam pembagian harta pailit. Dan seringkali yang terjadi dalam prakteknya, investor publik tidak mendapatkan sisa dari pembagian harta yang ada karena telah habis dibagikan pada para kreditor dan biaya lainnya.

---

Bankruptcy in today's world of business occurs regularly and is regarded as a normal occasion. Law Number 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment which applies in Indonesia provides creditors an alternative to file for bankruptcy towards a company which are his debtors. One of the parties which is the debtor that undergoes through file of bankruptcy is a listed company. In the event of a listed company undergoing bankruptcy, this would mean that public investors that are shareholders to the bankrupt company experience great loss. Public investors that are parties to the company are significantly disadvantaged because by the insolvency of the company in which he is an investor, he would not be able to sell the shares he owns in the company. At the same time, as a result of bankruptcy, his position as shareholder in the company would turn him into a debtor. Therefore, in distributing the asset of the dissolved company, the public investors would receive the asset second to the concurrent creditors. Frequently in practice, those public investors unfortunately do not receive any share from the dissolved asset because the remaining shares have been allocated to the concurrent creditors and other expenses."

"[Penerapan prinsip-prinsip tata kelola perusahaan yang baik oleh emiten merupakan pendukung pertumbuhan ekonomi suatu negara. Setiap emiten memiliki kewajiban kepada pemegang saham publik untuk melakukan prinsip-prinsip tata kelola yang baik kepada para pemegang sahamnya. Prinsip-prinsip tata kelola yang baik dapat dilakukan dengan berbagai cara, salah satunya yaitu laporan dokumen yang diumumkan kepada publik, akan tetapi, masih banyak emiten yang lalai atau sengaja memberikan laporan yang terlambat dan atau tidak sesuainya isi laporan dengan kondisi emiten tersebut. Tidak menerapkan prinsip-prinsip tata kelola perusahaan yang baik merupakan pelanggaran di dunia pasar modal bahkan bila suatu emiten terus-menerus melakukan pelanggaran dapat dikategorikan suatu kejahatan di bidang pasar modal. Hal tersebut sering terjadi disebabkan oleh karena rendahnya sanksi yang dapat dikenakan kepada emiten yang lalai melakukannya, rendahnya kuantitas penyidik di bidang pasar modal, dan rendahnya pengetahuan pemegang saham publik atas prinsip-prinsip tata kelola perusahaan yang baik.

---

The application of the principles of good corporate governance by listed companies are supporting a country's economic growth. Each issuer has an obligation to shareholders to do the principles of good governance to its shareholders. The principles of good governance can be done in various ways, one of which is a report that documents be made public, however, still a lot of issuers who are negligent or deliberately delayed reporting and content of the report or incompatibility with the condition of the issuer. Not to apply the principles of good corporate governance is an infringement on the world capital markets even if an issuer's continuous violations can be categorized a crime in the capital market. It is often caused by the lack of sanctions that can be imposed on issuers who fails to do so, the low quantity of investigators in the field of capital markets, and lack of knowledge of public shareholders on the principles of good corporate governance., The application of the principles of good corporate governance by listed

companies are supporting a country's economic growth. Each issuer has an

obligation to shareholders to do the principles of good governance to its

shareholders. The principles of good governance can be done in various ways, one

of which is a report that documents be made public, however, still a lot of issuers

who are negligent or deliberately delayed reporting and content of the report or

incompatibility with the condition of the issuer. Not to apply the principles of

good corporate governance is an infringement on the world capital markets even if

an issuer's continuous violations can be categorized a crime in the capital market.

It is often caused by the lack of sanctions that can be imposed on issuers who fails

to do so, the low quantity of investigators in the field of capital markets, and lack

of knowledge of public shareholders on the principles of good corporate

governance.]"

"[Tesis ini membahas mengenai pengaturan tentang pembelian kembalisaham atau yang sering disebut dengan buyback di pasar modal Indonesia yang dilakukan oleh Bank Tbk. yang secara khusus diatur dalam Peraturan Bapepam Nomor XI.B.2, namun dalam kondisi krisis global yang terjadi akhir-akhir ini, Bapepam mengeluarkan peraturan baru yang mengatur mengenai buyback pada kondisi pasar yang berfluktuasi secara signifikan, yaitu Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Nomor 2/POJK.04/2013. Peraturan baru tersebut memberi sejumlahkelonggaran dalam pelaksanaan buyback, terutama batas pembelian kembali saham yang dinaikkan menjadi 20% serta tidak perlu meminta persetujuan Rapat Umum Pemegang Saham (“RUPS”) terlebih dahulu. Digunakan metode penelitian kepustakaan yang bertujuan untuk menemukan masalah (problem finding) untuk kemudian menuju pada suatu penelitian untuk mengatasi masalah (problem solution). Permasalahan kemudian tibul dikarenakan adanya kelonggaran tentangkewajiban dilaksanakannya RUPS dalam pelaksanaan buyback saham yang mengakibatkan tersinggungnya / berkurangnya perlindungan terhadap pemegang saham perusahaan karena beralihnya kewenangan RUPS menjadi kewenangan Direksi perusahaan. Selanjutnya, bagaimana apabila setelah melakukan buyback, perseroan tetap mengalami kerugian, sehingga dalam hal ini direksi dapat saja dimintakan pertanggungjawabannya, namun untuk itu harus terlebih dahuludibuktikan bahwa direksi telah melanggar fiduciary duty-nya. Penelitian ini membahas mengenai tata cara dan persyaratan dalam pelaksanaan buyback oleh Bank sebagai emiten atau perusahaan publik berdasarkan Peraturan Bapepam Nomor XI.B.2 dan Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Nomor 2/POJK.04/2013, perlindungan pemegang saham dan tanggung jawab Direksi terhadap buyback yang dilakukan oleh perusahaan.;This thesis discusses on regulations related to share buyback by a PublicBank in Indonesian capital market that is specifically regulated in Bapepam Regulation Number XI.B.2, however in the current global crisis conditions, Bapepam has issued new regulations regulating on share buyback in the market conditions which fluctuating significantly, namely Financial Service Authority Regulations (“POJK”) Number 2/POJK.04/2013. Such new regulation gives some flexibilities in the buy back execution, particularly the limit of shares buy backincreased to be 20% and it is not necessary to get prior approval from the General Meeting of Shareholders. In this thesis is used literature research methodology with the aims to find out the problem (problem finding) and then to go to a research to overcome the problem (problem solution). The problem arises when the regulation causes a loose on the company’s obligation in conducting a Shareholders’ Meeting (related to share buyback), thus giving the Borad of Director of the company, on their sole discretion, to conduct share buyback. Thisaction gives an impact to the shareholders’ rights, in the meaning that the shareholders in this case do not have the right to participate nor give votes in the company’s corporate actions (in this case, share buyback). Furthermore, if the share buyback costs losses to the company, the Board of Directors of the company should be asked for its accountability, but to do so, it must be previously provedthat the Board of Directors has violated its fiduciary duty, in which it also corresponds to a doctrine namely the doctrine of business judgment rule. This study discusses the procedures and requirements in the implementation of the share buyback by the Issuer or public company based on Bapepam Regulations Number XI.B.2 and POJK Number 2/POJK.04/2013, the protection towards the company’s shareholders and the responsibility of the Board of Directors towardthe share buyback in relation to the doctrine of business judgment rule;This thesis discusses on regulations related to share buyback by a PublicBank in Indonesian capital market that is specifically regulated in BapepamRegulation Number XI.B.2, however in the current global crisis conditions,Bapepam has issued new regulations regulating on share buyback in the marketconditions which fluctuating significantly, namely Financial Service AuthorityRegulations (“POJK”) Number 2/POJK.04/2013. Such new regulation gives someflexibilities in the buy back execution, particularly the limit of shares buy backincreased to be 20% and it is not necessary to get prior approval from the GeneralMeeting of Shareholders. In this thesis is used literature research methodologywith the aims to find out the problem (problem finding) and then to go to aresearch to overcome the problem (problem solution). The problem arises whenthe regulation causes a loose on the company’s obligation in conducting aShareholders’ Meeting (related to share buyback), thus giving the Borad ofDirector of the company, on their sole discretion, to conduct share buyback. Thisaction gives an impact to the shareholders’ rights, in the meaning that theshareholders in this case do not have the right to participate nor give votes in thecompany’s corporate actions (in this case, share buyback). Furthermore, if theshare buyback costs losses to the company, the Board of Directors of the companyshould be asked for its accountability, but to do so, it must be previously provedthat the Board of Directors has violated its fiduciary duty, in which it alsocorresponds to a doctrine namely the doctrine of business judgment rule. Thisstudy discusses the procedures and requirements in the implementation of theshare buyback by the Issuer or public company based on Bapepam RegulationsNumber XI.B.2 and POJK Number 2/POJK.04/2013, the protection towards thecompany’s shareholders and the responsibility of the Board of Directors towardthe share buyback in relation to the doctrine of business judgment rule, This thesis discusses on regulations related to share buyback by a PublicBank in Indonesian capital market that is specifically regulated in BapepamRegulation Number XI.B.2, however in the current global crisis conditions,Bapepam has issued new regulations regulating on share buyback in the marketconditions which fluctuating significantly, namely Financial Service AuthorityRegulations (“POJK”) Number 2/POJK.04/2013. Such new regulation gives someflexibilities in the buy back execution, particularly the limit of shares buy backincreased to be 20% and it is not necessary to get prior approval from the GeneralMeeting of Shareholders. In this thesis is used literature research methodologywith the aims to find out the problem (problem finding) and then to go to aresearch to overcome the problem (problem solution). The problem arises whenthe regulation causes a loose on the company’s obligation in conducting aShareholders’ Meeting (related to share buyback), thus giving the Borad ofDirector of the company, on their sole discretion, to conduct share buyback. Thisaction gives an impact to the shareholders’ rights, in the meaning that theshareholders in this case do not have the right to participate nor give votes in thecompany’s corporate actions (in this case, share buyback). Furthermore, if theshare buyback costs losses to the company, the Board of Directors of the companyshould be asked for its accountability, but to do so, it must be previously provedthat the Board of Directors has violated its fiduciary duty, in which it alsocorresponds to a doctrine namely the doctrine of business judgment rule. Thisstudy discusses the procedures and requirements in the implementation of theshare buyback by the Issuer or public company based on Bapepam RegulationsNumber XI.B.2 and POJK Number 2/POJK.04/2013, the protection towards thecompany’s shareholders and the responsibility of the Board of Directors towardthe share buyback in relation to the doctrine of business judgment rule]"