Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Accountability is the key to good governance. In global administrative law, every policy made should be accountable. The given law should be accessible to the public. At the time of the global financial crisis, many countries did not have the necessary rules to solve the problems that arose. In Indonesia, the government?s decision to bail out Bank Century has remained controversial up to the present time. The need for a comprehensive law dealing with economic, political and social factors should be considered. The Indonesian Law regarding Government Administration provides for the code of conduct for government action. An entire chapter in the law has been dedicated to set out provisions on discretion, reflecting a two-way approach, namely: restriction of government action on the one hand and the protection of public rights on the other. In practice, however, such rule is not implemented in line with the intended formulation. There is still a need for harmonization with the law regarding State Administration Courts in Indonesia.

---

Akuntabilitas adalah kunci dari pemerintahan yang baik. Dalam hukum administrasi global, setiap kebijakan harus dapat dipertanggungjawabkan. Hukum yang ada harus bisa diakses oleh masyarakat. Ketika krisis keuangan global terjadi, banyak negara tidak memiliki hukum positif untuk mengatasinya. Di Indonesia, keputusan pemerintah dalam membailout Bank Century menjadi perdebatan sampai saat ini. Kebutuhan akan hukum yang komprehensif terkait ekonomi, politik dan sosial harus dipertimbangkan. UU Administrasi Pemerintahan Indonesia telah menyiapkan aturan dalam bertindak bagi pemerintah. Penempatan diskresi dalam satu bab tersendiri dapat dilihat dari dua sisi, batasan terhadap tindakan pemerintah sekaligus perlindungan bagi hak publik. Pada praktiknya, pelaksanaan dari aturan tersebut tidak semudah rumusan yang dimaksud. Harmonisasi dengan UU Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara masih dibutuhkan."

"Decentralisation system in Indonesia was introduced after the fall of the former President Soehartowith the objective of ensuring good governance and equitable development across all regions inthe country. Unfortunately, the implementation of desentralisasi has been complicated. Somescholars have suggested that the model was flawed as it did not consider Indonesia’s context of lessdeveloped administrative institutions in the regions. Not only did desentralisasi cause headachesfor the government, it also created confusion for foreign investors. Consequently, it affects theinvestment climate in the country and undermines the perception of Indonesia as an attractiveplace to invest in. In certain cases, desentralisasi has also led to claims by foreign investors forinvestor-State arbitration under Indonesia’s international investment agreements (IIAs). Thispaper analyses the problems of desentralisasi in Indonesia, its effects to foreign investors andsuggests ways to alleviate the problems by modifying and using Indonesia’s IIAs effectively.Setelah jatuhnya rezim Soeharto, sistem pemerintahan desentralisasi mulai diterapkan diIndonesia dengan tujuan untuk memastikan tata kelola yang baik dan pembangunan yangadil di seluruh wilayah Republik Indonesia. Sayangnya, penerapan desentralisasi sangatlahsulit. Beberapa akademisi mengatakan bahwa model sistem desentralisasi yang diterapkan diIndonesia tidak sesuai dengan situasi di lapangan di Indonesia, khususnya di daerah-daerahyang belum mempunyai kantor-kantor administratif yang berfungsi dengan baik. Desentralisasimenimbulkan berbagai masalah bagi pemerintah dan membingungkan para investor asing.Akibatnya, desentralisasi memperburuk iklim investasi di Indonesia dan menimbulkan persepsinegatif mengenai Indonesia sebagai tempat berinvestasi. Dalam beberapa kasus tertentu,desentralisasi juga menyebabkan munculnya tuntutan-tuntutan oleh para investor asing diarbitrase antara investor dan Pemerintah berdasarkan perjanjian investasi internasional (PII)Indonesia. Makalah ini menganalisa masalah-masalah yang ditimbulkan oleh desentralisasi diIndonesia, efek-efeknya bagi para investor asing dan memberikan saran mengenai cara-carauntuk menangani beberapa masalah tersebut dengan mengubah dan menggunakan PII Indonesiasecara efektif."

"Tanjung Pinang City is a transit area for troubled Indonesian overseas workers from Singaporeand Malaysia. Previous research revealed that citizens of Tanjung Pinang City criticized thetreatments given by the local government to the deported workers by reason that they were notthe citizens of the Riau Islands Province, yet the local government has to provide shelters andfunds prior to returning them to their home towns. The treatments for the deported workers in thetransit area have also raised pros and cons among the stakeholders who are in charge of handlingthe deported workers. This circumstance may not occur if a special regional regulation of theRiau Islands Province has been issued to govern the troubled Indonesian overseas workers in thetransit area. Due to this vacuum of law, this research aims to establish a mechanism in handlingthe deported workers in the transit area by designing an integrative-progressive model which canbe adopted by the stakeholders. The model is to link the legal and non- legal issues and as wellas to provide the collaborative mechanisms for the stakeholders based on the approaches of theintegrative and progressive legal theory.Kota Tanjung Pinang merupakan salah satu daerah transit bagi Tenaga Kerja IndonesiaBermasalah/TKIB yang dideportasi dari Malaysia dan Singapura. Pada penelitian sebelumnyamenyatakan bahwa penduduk Tanjung Pinang mengkritisi layanan yang diberikan pemerintahkota kepada warga deportasi pada dasarnya bukan warga Provinsi Kepulauan Riau. Prodan kontra pendapat mengenai kebijakan Pemerintah dalam menangani TKIB termasukpenyediakan rumah penampungan dan pendanaan untuk memulangkan mereka ke kampunghalamannya. Hal ini tidak akan terjadi seandainya Pemerintah Kepulauan Riau menerbit Perdaterkait penanganan TKIB di daerah transit. Sehubungan dengan kekosongan hukum tersebut,penelitian ini bertujuan merumuskan mekanisme penanganan TKIB di daerah transit denganmerancang model intergratif-progersif yang dapat diadopsi oleh pihak terkait. Model tersebutmenghubungkan persoalan hukum dan non hukum serta mekanisme kolaborasi bagi pihakterkait berdasarkan pendekatan teori hukum intergratif dan progresif."

"Fiduciary Guarantee (Fiduciary Law) which approved by the House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia (DPR RI) on September 9, 1999 has accommodate the public needs to help business activities and to provide legal certainty to the interested parties. With the increase in the development activities and the needs for funding, a majority of funds are needed to meet the lending and borrowing activities that require protection for the lender and the borrower through a guarantee institution that can provide legal certainty and protection to the lender or the borrower. Viewed from the current lending practices, there is a difficulty on the part of the Fiduciary Guarantee to conduct the fiduciary execution if the Fiduciary Grantor defaults since in fact the goods being a fiduciary object are still in the possession of the Fiduciary Grantor or Debtor, then in line with the provisions of article 1977 of the Indonesian Civil Code, known as the principle of bezit geldt als volkomen titel."

"The General Meeting of Shareholders (GMS) is one of the company?s organs with the significant role of determining the business course and other issues related to corporate actions; as it is granted by law to the shareholders of the company. Any decision can be made in the GMS; such as determining the shareholders? unanimous concurrence on the proposed meeting agenda or even if the results of the meeting are actually contrary to such agenda caused by dissenting among themselves. However, the GMS can also pose certain obstacles in situations where one or more shareholders (that appear to be a majority shareholder) fail to act in good faith or have an internal dispute with other shareholder(s) in the company. The shareholder concerned can use such majority position to cause a dead-lock in the GMS, as a result of which the rest of the shareholder(s) are unable to make any decisions concerning the proposed GMS agenda. The aim of this article is to look at the effectiveness of Article 86 of the Indonesian Company Law for the purpose of overcoming the above described situation. The said Article 86 was formulated without considering the possibility of shareholder intentionally undertaking such unlawful measures. Moreover, the article is aimed at observing the concordance between the Indonesian Company Law and the Indonesian Procedural Law."

"Since eradicating corruption having been continously encouraged by late governments ? and until now ? , there would not be less important as to retracting the corrupted assets. There are many aspects to be considered in doing such action, such as manifesting the legal aspects of administrative law, and so other applied national regulations. By these regulations, such as Law No. 7 of 2006 on Ratification of United Nations Convention against Corruption, 2003 (Konvensi Perserikatan Bangsa Bangsa Anti-Korupsi, 2003), Law Number 25 of 2003 On Amendment to Law Number 15 of 2002 on Money Laundering, Act 30 of 2002 on Corruption Eradication Commission, Law Number 20 Year 2001 regarding Amendment to Law Number 31 Year 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption, and Government Regulation Number 65 of 1999 on Implementation Procedures for Examination of State Property, retraction the corrupted assets should be define in order to get known about eradicating corruption. Another issue that urgently to be defined, as it also become main subject of retracting assets, is the asset itself. Indeed, as the asset which become mainly discussed about is State assets. So, it would be very necessary to clearly have a distinction between State responsibility and that of irresponsibility of the State, in order to settle down, as an after effect, many interpretations."

"This article is an examination of the implementation of the United Nations FrameworkConvention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as a Multilateral Environmental Agreement(MEA) in Indonesia. It identifies domestic challenges of the Convention in Indonesia?sdecentralisation. The implementation of decentralisation policy in 2001 worsens theinherent problems faced by the Convention in Indonesia?s legal system. As a MEA,the Convention contains only general rules for the state parties and no specific legalobligation to reduce emission. The Convention also has legitimacy problems. TheIndonesia?s method to transform treaties into domestic legal system is still problematic.These two challenges are worsened by the implementation of decentralisation policy.The national government faces difficulties to drive lower government units to adhereto the Convention rules because they have new authorities that can constraint effortto achieve the goal of the Convention.Artikel ini adalah eksaminasi terhadap implementasi Konvensi Perubahan Iklim(UNFCCC) yang merupakan satu bentuk perjanjian multilateral di bidang lingkungan(MEA). Artikel ini mengidentifikasi tantangan yang dihadapi oleh UNFCCC dalamkonteks desentralisasi di Indonesia. Kebijakan desentralisasi telah memperburukmasalah yang selama ini telah dihadapi oleh UNFCCC di Indonesia. Sebagai salahsatu MEA, UNFCCC hanya mengandung aturan umum untuk negara-negara anggotadan tidak mempunyai kewajiban hukum khusus untuk mengurangi emisi. Tanpakewajiban khusus, negara-negara anggota, terutama negara berkembang, belumterikat atas target level emisi tertentu. Selain itu, UNFCCC mempunyai masalahlegitimasi di Indonesia yang berhubungan dengan metode transformasi perjanjianinternasional ke dalam hukum nasional. Masalah legitimasi membuat UNFCCCmenjadi sulit untuk mengikat entitas di dalam negeri. Dalam konteks desentralisasi,kedua masalah tersebut memberikan kesulitan bagi pemerintah pusat dalammengarahkan pemerintah daerah untuk melaksanakan upaya untuk mencapaitujuan UNFCCC. Desentralisasi memberikan kewenangan pemerintah daerah untukmembuat kebijakan yang dapat bertentangan dengan UNFCCC."

"Every government operates secrecy as one of mechanism to protect thestate, the people, and the assets from threats. There is lack of clarity ofrules for the secrecy system in Indonesia. Ultimately, there is no uniformconception among government officials, because each agency makes itsown policy and system. This condition brings disadvantage to society,because there is no clear guidance on this subject and it will not beable to push the government to act more responsible in managing theinformation. The rules about ?closed archives? in Law No. 43 of 2009about Archives and the term of ?security classification? that mentionedin Government Regulation No. 28 of 2012 about the Implementationof Law No. 43 of 2009 about Archives, do not help at all in solving thatproblems. To get the accountability in the management of closed archive,the government does not have any other option than establishing a setof rules that describe a clear secrecy system. The secrecy concept canbe framed within the concept of records life cycle, in order to be moreadjustable to the existing system."