Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Pemerintah Indonesia mengeluarkan undang-undang Pertambangan yang baru No.4 tahun 2009, Undang-undang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara (UU Minerba) di tanggal 12 Januari 2009. Undang-undang yang baru tersebut untuk mengganti Undang-undang Pertambangan No. 11 tahun 1967 tentang Ketentuan-ketentuan Pokok Pertambangan yang dianggap tidak lagi sesuai dengan perkembangan praktek Pertambangan di dalam negeri dan luar negeri. Pasal 169 dari UU Minerba yang baru, menyebutkan bahwa semua Kontrak Karya Pertambangan Batubara (PKP2B) harus mengikuti perubahan regulasi pertambangan yang baru dalam waktu satu tahun semenjak UU Minerba yang baru diundangkan. Mengacu kepada pasal tersebut, Pemerintah selanjutnya meminta negosisasi ulang PKP2B sehingga ketentuan-ketentuan dalam UU Minerba yang baru diakomodasi kedalam semua PKP2B. Setelah memerlukan waktu bertahun-tahun dalam proses negoisasi ulang PKP2B, Pemerintah Indonesia berhasil menerapkan amandement tersebut terhadapa semua PKP2B yang ada mulai 1 Januari 2018. Terdapat 6 isu strategis yang timbul selama proses negosiasi ulang tersebut, yaitu pertama, lisensi operasi tambang batubara yang berkaitan dengan keberlangsungan usaha pertambanganan batubara setelah konsensi PKP2B berakhir; kedua, kewajiban untuk pemrosesan barang tambang didalam negeri; ketiga, kewajiban untuk melakukan pembelian dalam negeri untuk material dan jasa; keempat, kewajiban divestasi yang sesuai dengan jumlah tahun operasi; kelima, luasan area konsesi mengikuti UU Minerba yang baru; keenam, penerimaan Negara dimana UU Minerba yang baru menyatakan PKP2B harus mengikuti peraturan Pajak yang sedang berlaku dengan segala konsekwensinya. Studi ini melakukan pengujian untuk melihat bilamana amandemen kontrak karya memiliki pengaruh yang merugikan terhadap performa Keuangan perusahaan-perusahan tambang barubara. Studi ini membanding performa Keuangan perusahaan-perusahaan tersebut untuk periode 3 tahun sebelum dan 2 tahun setelah amendmen tersebut diberlakukan. Mengambil sampel Perusahaan-perusahaan yang terdaftar di bursa effek Jakarta untuk dianalisa performa keuangannya selama 5 tahun terakhir dari 2015 hingga 2019. Kesimpulan dari studi ini menunjukkan bagaimana perusahaan-perusahaan tambang batubara merespon atas perubahan kebijakan Pemerintah tersebut dan selanjutnya memberikan saran kepada Pemerintah dalam melakukan perubahan kebijakan.

---

Government Indonesia issued new mining law No. 4 tahun 2009, Undang-undang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara (UU Minerba) on 12 January 2009. This new mining law is to overrule Undang-undang Pertambangan No. 11 Year 1967 about Ketentuan-ketentuan Pokok Pertambangan which was considered no longer compatible with development of mining practices both domestic and international. Article 169 of new UU Minerba, cites that any existing Coal Contract of Work (CCoW) has to follow the new mining regulation within one year after UU Minerba issuance date. By referring to the article Government then called out for CCoW renegotiation so clauses in new UU Minerba accommodated into all CCoW. After taking several years in CCoW renegotiation, Government Indonesia has managed to impose the amendment to all CCoW by 1 January 2018. There are six strategic issues called out during the renegotiation consist of 1st. mining operation license which dealing with business continuity after CCoW period expired, 2nd. Domestic processing obligation to where Coal mining company has to establish coal processing in country, 3rd. Domestic purchase obligation for material and services, 4th. Percentage divestment obligation to fulfil according years of operation, 5th. Size of area concession where coal mining company only allow much lesser area concession for mining operation, 6th. State revenue under new UU Minerba required to follow prevailing tax law and its consequences. This study is to examine whether the amendment has significant unfavourable impact toward coal mining companies’ performance. The study compares their financial performance for the period of 3 years before and 2 years after coal contract of work applied. Taking sample from coal mining companies listed in Jakarta stock exchange to analysis financial performance for the period from 2015 to 2019. The finding from this study shows how coal industry responding the change in government regulation and further provides suggestion to Government in changing regulation. "

"ABSTRAKPenelitian ini dilakukan berdasarkan keadaan dunia pertambangan secara umum mengalami berbagai hambatan salah satunya sengketa pertambangan yang diakibatkan oleh masalah pertanahan. Hambatan penyelesaian sengketa tanah juga dialami oleh PT Kaltim Prima Coal merupakan salah satu produsen batubara di Indonesia. PT Kaltim Prima Coal melakukan kegiatan operasi pertambangan batubara berdasarkan Perjanjian Karya Pengusahaan Pertambangan Batubara Nomor J2/Ji.Dn/16/82 yang dibuat dan ditandatangani oleh Pemerintah Republik Indonesia dan PT Kaltim Prima Coal pada tanggal 8 April 1982 ldquo;PKP2B rdquo; . PT Kaltim Prima Coal dalam melakukan kegiatan operasional pertambangan di wilayah PKP2B seringkali terhambat akibat adanya warga yang menyatakan memiliki tanah perwatasan di dalam wilayah PKP2B PT Kaltim Prima Coal. Namun kenyaataan dasar hukum memiliki hak atas tanah perwatasan di dalam wilayah PKP2B PT Kaltim Prima Coal tidak sesuai dengan UU No. 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara serta UU No. 5 Tahun 1960 tentang Peraturan Dasar Pokok-Pokok Agraria.

---

ABSTRACTThis research is based on general mining practice facing many obstacles one of the major problem is land dispute. The land dispute issue is also being faced by PT Kaltim Prima Coal, one of the largest coal producers in Indonesia. PT Kaltim Prima Coal conducts its mining activity based on Coal Contract of Work Number J2 Ji.Dn 16 82 made between the Government of Republic Indonesia and PT Kaltim Prima Coal dated April 8, 1982 ldquo CCoW rdquo . PT Kaltim Prima Coal in conducting mining activity in the CCoW area is mostly disturb by residents that claims the tanah perwatasan ownership inside the CCoW area. This issue is against Law Number 4 of 2009 on Mineral and Coal Mining and Law No. 5 of 1960 on Agrarian Law."

"ABSTRAKTesis ini membahas mengenai penguasaan Negara terhadap pertambangan yang merupakan salah satu hasil kekayaan alam terkandung di wilayah Negara kesatuan Indonesia. Penguasaan yang diberikan terhadap Negara merupakan amanat konstitusi pasal 33 ayat 3 UUD 1945 yang telah menjadi kesepakatan bersama seluruh rakyat Indonesia. Penafsiran terkait penguasaan Negara dalam hal ini, pemerintah memiliki kewenangan untuk mengatur, mengurus, dan mengawasi terhadap seluruh kegiatan pertambangan sejauh yang berda dalam wilayah Indonesia. Dalam hal pengaturan dimuat dalam undang-undang nomor 4 Tahun 2009 Tentang Mineral dan batubara yang kemudian diikuti peraturan-peraturan terkait lainnya yang berada dibawah undang-undang. Kemudian dalam hal pengurusan Negara terlibat sebagai pelaku usaha melalaui perusahaan Negara atau dikenal dengan Badan Usaha Milik Negara (BUMN). Selanjutnya dalam hal pengawasan dilakukan oleh Menteri, Gubernur dan Bupati/Walikota Sesuai dengan kewenangannya masing-masing yang diatur dalam pasal 140 (3) dan 141 Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 Tentang Mineral dan Batubara. Selanjutnya dalam hal upaya peningkatan kesejahteraan masyarakat dapat dilakukan dengan program Community development, Corporate social responsibility (CSR), Sustainable development, Good Corporate Governace (GCG). Simpulan dari hasil penelitian ini, bahwa ketentuan undang-undang yang berlaku saat ini ternyata memiliki banyak permasalahan yang terjadi dalam penyelenggaraannya. Diantaranya terkait dengan perizinan yang sering tumpang tindih, kegiatan pertambangan yang illegal, penggelapan pajak oleh para pelaku usaha pertambangan, dan adanya ketentuan terkait divestasi saham bagi asing dalam jangka waktu tertentu. Dari permasalahan tumpang tindih perizinan maka penulis menyarakan agar dilakukan sebagaimana yang dimuat dalam undang-undang nomor 37 Tahun 1967 Tentang Ketentuan-ketentuan Pokok Pertambangan yang pernah berlaku di Indonesia.

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis discus about the governance of nation on mining which has been one of natural wealth contained in the unitary state o Indonesia. The governance given to country is a constitutional mandate of article 33 paragraphs 3 of the 1945 constitution which has been agreed by all Indonesian societies. Interpretations related to control of the State in this case, the government has the authority to manage, administer, and oversee the entire drift mining activities in the region as far as Indonesia. In terms of the regulation contained in Law No. 4 Year 2009 on Mineral and Coal which is then followed by other relevant regulations under the legislation. Then in terms of the maintenance of the State involved as entrepreneurs through State company, known as State Owned Enterprises (SOE). Furthermore, in terms of supervision by the Minister, Governor and Regent / Mayor accordance with their respective authorities are set out in article 140 (3) and 141 of Law Number 4 Year 2009 on Mineral and Coal. Then in terms of improving the welfare of the community can be actualized with the Community development, corporate social responsibility (CSR), Sustainable development, good corporate Governance (GCG). The conclusions from this research, that the provisions of law applicable at this time have many problems that occur in its implementation. Some of them were related to licensing that often overlap, illegal mining, tax evasion by businesses of mining, and the provisions relating to foreign divestment within a certain timeframe. Overlapping of the licensing issues, the author advised that done as contained in Law No. 37 Year 1967 About Basic Provisions of Mining ever in Indonesia."

"Transformasi ekonomi di negara Indonesia tidak terlepas dari dukungan aktivitas pertambangan batubara sebagai salah satu objek galian yang dioptimalisasikan baik oleh individu perseorangan maupun badan hukum seperti perseroan terbatas sebagai pelaku usaha. Implementasi pertambangan batubara hanya dapat diselenggarakan dengan mengindahkan ketentuan perundang-undangan yang telah diperbaharui untuk menyesuaikan kebutuhan masyarakat dan pemerintah yang dinamis. Rumusan masalah adalah pengaturan usaha pertambangan serta tinjauan investasi klasifikasi objek galian di Indonesia. Penelitian ini juga menelusuri praktik pemberian izin usaha pada usaha penambangan batubara di Provinsi Jambi. Penelitian dilakukan menurut metode yuridis normatif dan menelusuri Undang-Undang terkait dengan Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara beserta peraturan turunan lainnya yang berkaitan. Hasil penelitian ini menguraikan penjelasan mengenai Undang-Undang No. 3 Tahun 2020 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara sebagaimana diubah oleh Undang-Undang No. 4 Tahun 2009. Ketentuan sebelum diubah untuk mengakomodasi ketentuan pertambangan nasional agar selaras dengan kepentingan nasional, kepastian hukum, dan keterbukaan investor, serta pelestarian ekosistem ekologi. Investasi di bidang pertambangan terbuka untuk investor dengan ketentuan pemenuhan minimum 51% (lima puluh satu persen) dimiliki oleh investor dalam negeri melalui Bursa Efek Indonesia. Pembenahan peraturan persaingan usaha di bidang pertambangan mineral batubara mempunyai objektif untuk mencegah pertentangan ketentuan terkait perizinan berusaha dengan penanaman modal dalam sektor jasa pertambangan. Pemerintah hadir dalam menciptakan iklim persaingan usaha yang jujur dan tidak melawan hukum. PT X mempunyai potensi melakukan praktik oligopoli, pembuatan perjanjian seperti perjanjian tender, dan/atau pendominasian pasar melalui posisi dominan. Dengan ini, PT X mempunyai kemampuan untuk menentukan besaran produksi, klasifikasi jenis, pendistribusian, dan pertumbuhan per kapita batubara yang selaras dengan ketentuan persaingan usaha.

---

Economic transformation in Indonesia is inseparable from the support of coal mining activities as one of the excavation objects which is optimized both by individuals and legal entities such as limited liability companies as business actors. The implementation of coal mining can only be carried out by complying with the provisions of laws and regulations that have been updated to suit the needs of the dynamic community and government. The issue of the research is the regulation of the mining business and the investment review of the classification of excavated objects in Indonesia. This research also explores the practice of granting business licenses to coal mining businesses in Jambi Province. The research was carried out according to normative juridical methods and traced the Law related to Mineral and Coal Mining along with other related derivative regulations. The results of this study describe the explanation regarding Law No. 3 of 2020 concerning Mineral and Coal Mining as amended by Law No. 4 of 2009. Provisions before being amended to accommodate national mining regulations so that they are aligned with national interests, legal certainty, and investor transparency, as well as the preservation of ecological ecosystems. Investments in the mining sector are open to be purchased by investors through the Indonesia Stock Exchange with the condition that a minimum fulfillment of 51% (fifty one percent) is owned by domestic investors. The objective of reforming business competition regulations in the coal mineral mining sector is to prevent conflicting provisions related to business licensing and investment in the mining services sector. The government is present in creating a business competition climate that is fair and not against the law. PT X has the potential to practice oligopoly, drafting cartel agreements, and/or dominating the market. With this, PT X has the ability to determine the amount of production, type classification, distribution, and growth per capita of coal in line with the provisions of business competition."

"[Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 merupakan undang-undang yang dapat dikatakan cukup kontroversial bagi pertambangan mineral logam, karena merubah alur industri pertambangan logam tanah air menjadi tidak hanya mencakup kegiatan pertambangan semata, akan tetapi juga diwajibkan untuk perusahaan-perusahaan pertambangan melakukan kegiatan pengolahan dan pemurnian di dalam negeri dalam kurun waktu hanya 5 (lima) tahun saja. Keterbatasan infrastruktur di daerah-daerah, ketidaktersediaan listrik, serta kompleksnya birokrasi yang melingkupi perluasan bidang usaha lintas sektor antara pertambangan (hulu) dengan pemurnian (hilir) membuat hal tersebut menjadi terlalu sulit diwujudkan, ditambah lagi dengan inkonsistensi Pemerintah yang menetapkan kewajiban divestasi saham bagi Perusahaan Pertambangan Penanaman Modal Asing, dari 20% (dua puluh persen) di tahun 2010, menjadi 51% (lima puluh satu persen) di tahun 2012. Selain kedua hal tersebut, pada tahun ketiga sejak Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 diberlakukan, Pemerintah telah melarang kegiatan ekspor mineral mentah, akan tetapi mencabutnya kembali dan menetapkan ketentuan ekspor dengan tambahan birokrasi yang semakin panjang, sehingga menyebabkan investor pertambangan penanaman modal asing kehilangan waktu dan sulit dalam merealisasikan amanah Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tersebut. Penulisan ini bertujuan untuk menampilkan fakta kesulitan-kesulitan yang dialami oleh PT. X selaku perusahaan penanaman modal asing dalam bidang pertambangan mineral nikel oleh karena kebijakan pertambangan yang tidak cukup berimbang.

---

Law Number 4 Year 2009 could be considered as a controversy for the metal mineral mining businesses, since it has changed the scheme of domestic metal mineral mining industry to not only contains mining but also obliged the mining companies to conduct mineral smelting and processing domestically within period of only 5 (five) years. The limitation of infrastructure facilities within the counties, unavailability of electrical source, and the complexity of bureaucracies that facilitates such cross borders industrial sectors between the mining (mainstream industries) , and the smelting and processing (downstream industries) has caused such policy too unreasonable to be accomplished, moreover the inconsistency of the Government whom has stipulated the divestment terms for the foreign investing mining company, from 20% (twenty percent) in 2010, and re-stipulated it to became 51% (fifty one) percent within 2012. Apart from those two main issues herein, by the third year since the enactment of Law Number 4 Year 2009, the Government has banned the raw mineral export activities, however revoked such laws and enacted a new regulation of raw mineral export policies with additional/ longer bureaucracy’s mechanism process, therefore it has put the foreign mining investors within difficult circumstances to actualize the mandate of the laws itself. This Thesis intends to display the problematic facts that experienced by PT. X as a foreign investing mining company in nickel mining by the insufficient fairness of mining policies.;Law Number 4 Year 2009 could be considered as a controversy for the metal mineral mining businesses, since it has changed the scheme of domestic metal mineral mining industry to not only contains mining but also obliged the mining companies to conduct mineral smelting and processing domestically within period of only 5 (five) years. The limitation of infrastructure facilities within the counties, unavailability of electrical source, and the complexity of bureaucracies that facilitates such cross borders industrial sectors between the mining (mainstream industries) , and the smelting and processing (downstream industries) has caused such policy too unreasonable to be accomplished, moreover the inconsistency of the Government whom has stipulated the divestment terms for the foreign investing mining company, from 20% (twenty percent) in 2010, and re-stipulated it to became 51% (fifty one) percent within 2012. Apart from those two main issues herein, by the third year since the enactment of Law Number 4 Year 2009, the Government has banned the raw mineral export activities, however revoked such laws and enacted a new regulation of raw mineral export policies with additional/ longer bureaucracy’s mechanism process, therefore it has put the foreign mining investors within difficult circumstances to actualize the mandate of the laws itself. This Thesis intends to display the problematic facts that experienced by PT. X as a foreign investing mining company in nickel mining by the insufficient fairness of mining policies.;Law Number 4 Year 2009 could be considered as a controversy for the metal mineral mining businesses, since it has changed the scheme of domestic metal mineral mining industry to not only contains mining but also obliged the mining companies to conduct mineral smelting and processing domestically within period of only 5 (five) years. The limitation of infrastructure facilities within the counties, unavailability of electrical source, and the complexity of bureaucracies that facilitates such cross borders industrial sectors between the mining (mainstream industries) , and the smelting and processing (downstream industries) has caused such policy too unreasonable to be accomplished, moreover the inconsistency of the Government whom has stipulated the divestment terms for the foreign investing mining company, from 20% (twenty percent) in 2010, and re-stipulated it to became 51% (fifty one) percent within 2012. Apart from those two main issues herein, by the third year since the enactment of Law Number 4 Year 2009, the Government has banned the raw mineral export activities, however revoked such laws and enacted a new regulation of raw mineral export policies with additional/ longer bureaucracy’s mechanism process, therefore it has put the foreign mining investors within difficult circumstances to actualize the mandate of the laws itself. This Thesis intends to display the problematic facts that experienced by PT. X as a foreign investing mining company in nickel mining by the insufficient fairness of mining policies., Law Number 4 Year 2009 could be considered as a controversy for the metal mineral mining businesses, since it has changed the scheme of domestic metal mineral mining industry to not only contains mining but also obliged the mining companies to conduct mineral smelting and processing domestically within period of only 5 (five) years. The limitation of infrastructure facilities within the counties, unavailability of electrical source, and the complexity of bureaucracies that facilitates such cross borders industrial sectors between the mining (mainstream industries) , and the smelting and processing (downstream industries) has caused such policy too unreasonable to be accomplished, moreover the inconsistency of the Government whom has stipulated the divestment terms for the foreign investing mining company, from 20% (twenty percent) in 2010, and re-stipulated it to became 51% (fifty one) percent within 2012. Apart from those two main issues herein, by the third year since the enactment of Law Number 4 Year 2009, the Government has banned the raw mineral export activities, however revoked such laws and enacted a new regulation of raw mineral export policies with additional/ longer bureaucracy’s mechanism process, therefore it has put the foreign mining investors within difficult circumstances to actualize the mandate of the laws itself. This Thesis intends to display the problematic facts that experienced by PT. X as a foreign investing mining company in nickel mining by the insufficient fairness of mining policies.]"

"Penurunan harga batubara dunia mempengaruhi penurunan harga batubara Indonesia. Hal tersebut meningkatkan persaingan yang terjadi di industri kontraktor pertambangan batubara. PT Saptaindra Sejati, merupakan salah satu kontraktor tambang bataubara yang ada di Indonesia, berupaya untuk meningkatkan daya saing. Kinerja operasional merupakan salah satu hal yang dapat ditingkatkan sehingga kegiatan operasional penambangan batubara dapat berjalan dengan efektif dan efisien. Mengacu pada penelitian Anh et al. (2012), Iriani dan Hadiputra (2010) dan Psomas et al. (2012), ISO 9001:2008 merupakan sistem manajemen mutu yang memiliki pengaruh positif terhadap kinerja operasional suatu perusahaan, dan PT Saptaindra Sejati telah menerapkan ISO 9001:2008 sejak tahun 2011. Penelitian ini memiliki tujuan untuk menguji pengaruh implementasi ISO 9001:2008 terhadap kinerja operasional penambangan PT Saptaindra Sejati, dengan metode survei kuesioner yang diberikan kepada level jabatan department head dan section head di departemen engineering, production dan plant. Pengolahan data survei kuesioner dengan menggunakan SPSS versi 22 menunjukan bahwa terdapat pengaruh positif antara penerapan ISO 9002:2008, melalui kedelapan prinsipnya, dengan kinerja operasional penambangan batubara. Namun dari delapan prinsip tersebut, prinsip keterlibatan karyawan masih belum optimal dilaksanakan. Oleh karna itu perlu dilakukan penilaian kuantitatif keterlibatan karyawan dalam aktifitas manajemen mutu."

"It is well known that the Asia Pacific region is the focus on a global scale from the world's largest mining houses. Asia is indeed an exploration hot spot especially among the Australian and North American mining companies. Indonesia at present ranks close to or at the top position as preferred destination for mining investment combining a strong basis of geological prospective with conducive mining law, taxation imposts and low political risks to mineral exploration and development."

"Japan and Indonesia should work closely to achieve their needs. Japan imports coal particularly steam coal and exports its technology, CCT. Indonesia exports its coal as well as develops domestic coal utilization. This mutually benefit cooperation program has actually been starting since the 1980s that involves exploration, utilization technology and environment. It is worthwhile to take an advantage of Japan's coal policy by enhancing further mutually benefit cooperation between the two countries."

"Nowadays Indonesia is well known for its tin, copper, and coal. The mining activities has been started even before the colonial era as early as 17th century. The first post-independence Indonesian mining law was announced in 1960, however foreign capital law was just established in 1967. Since metal and coal have become important export commodities, the Government has tried to encourage mining industries by improving investment climate and a series of deregulation package has recently been made."

"Revisi Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 menjadi Undang-Undang Nomor 3 Tahun 2020 seolah mereduksi kewenangan pemerintah daerah. Sebanyak 19 pasal yang telah direvisi yang bertalian dengan kewenangan pemerintah daerah hampir seluruh kewenangan pemerintah daerah ditarik menjadi kewenangan pusat, di dalam penelitian ini akan menyajikan persoalan mengenai ketengan pemerintah daerah pada urusan mineral batubara kepada pemerintah pusat. kewenangan pemerintah daerah provinsi maupun kabupaten/kota pada urusan pertambangan, merupakan urusan yang bersifat concurrent yang dalam penanganannya melibatkan antara pemerintah pusat dan pemerintah daerah, menarik sebagian besar kewenangan dan tidak melibatkan pemerintah daerah tentu berpotensi berimplikasi negatif dalam hal penyelenggaraan urusan pertambangan mineral dan batubara, misalnya, mencakup dana bagi hasil, tanggung jawab sosial perusahaan, resistensi masyarakat setempat akibat kurang jelasnya mekanisme keberatan atau penolakan mereka terhadap kehadiran penambangan di daerahnya, lemahnya isu pengawasan dan pembinaan dalam mengurangi tingkat risiko sosial dan lingkungan, dan lebih penting memangkas jarak antara pemerintah dan masyarakat. .....The revision of Law Number 4 of 2009 to Law Number 3 of 2020 revised 135 articles from the 217 articles contained in Law Number. 4 of 2009, in detail there are 73 articles that have been added, 51 articles have been amended, and 11 articles have been deleted. As many as 19 revised articles relating to the authority of local governments, almost all local government authorities have been withdrawn to the central authority, leaving room for delegation of part of the authority of the Central Government to provincial local governments for the issuance of IPR and SIPB, in this study will present the implications of regional city district governments. no longer have space of authority in coal mineral mining affairs. the authority of the provincial and district / city governments in mining affairs, is a concurrent affair which in its handling involves the central government and regional governments, withdrawing most of the authority and does not involve local governments, of course, has the potential to have negative implications in terms of carrying out mineral and coal mining affairs. for example, it includes profit-sharing funds, corporate social responsibility, local community resistance due to unclear mechanisms for their objection or resistance to the presence of mining in their area, weak issues of supervision and guidance in reducing the level of social and environmental risk, and more importantly reducing the distance between the government and Public. 

"