Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Penelitian ini membahas tentang dampak pengalihan saham pada perusahaan tambang terhadap Izin Usaha Pertambangan (IUP). Dilakukannya penelitian ini berkaitan dengan adanya pasal dalam Undang-Undang No. 4 tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara yang melarang adanya pengalihan IUP. Larangan pengalihan IUP ini terkait dengan maraknya jual beli izin pertambangan pada masa peraturan pertambangan masih diatur dalam UU No. 11 tahun 1967 tentang Ketentuan-Ketentuan Pokok Pertambangan. Larangan tersebut membuat pengusaha tambang mencari cara bagaimana agar dapat mengalihkan IUP, salah satu cara yang dianggap tidak melanggar Undang-Undang adalah melakukan pengambilalihan saham terhadap perusahaan pemilik IUP. Kemudian muncul pertanyaan apakah jika saham mayoritas perusahaan tambang pemilik IUP beralih, maka kepemilikan atas IUP ikut beralih ke tangan perusahaan pengambilalih? Bagaimana sebenarnya dampak dari pengambilalihan saham tersebut terhadap kedudukan IUP perusahaan yang sahamnya terambilalih. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis empiris, dimana menggunakan UU No. 4 tahun 2009 dan Undang-Undang No. 40 tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas sebagai data primernya.Berdasarkan hasil penelitian, dapat disimpulkan bahwa walaupun 99% saham perusahaan pemilik IUP diambilalih, namum kepemilikan IUP tidak akan ikut beralih, jika kedua belah pihak tidak melakukan proses pengalihan IUP. Proses administrasi dan persyaratan pengalihan IUP dan pengambilalihan saham memiliki caranya masing-masing. Adanya ketidakharmonisan antara peraturan perundang-undangan yang mengatur tentang pertambangan dengan peraturan perundang-undangan yang mengatur tentang perseroan, terutama dalam hal pengambilalihan saham yang membuat penerapan peraturan pengalihan saham pada perusahaan tambang sulit untuk dapat ditaati oleh masyarakat.

---

This research examines the impacts of shares takeover in mining company to the Mining Permits. The background of this research is Law of The Republic Indonesia Number 4 of 2009 concering Mineral and Coal Mining. This regulation prohibits transfer of Mining Permits. The prohibition is related to the raise of the sale and purchase of mining permits when the regulation of mining was still regulated in Law of The Republic Indonesia Number 11 of 1967 concering Basic Provisions of Mining. This prohibition has caused mine operators to look for the solution to transfer the Mining Permits. One of the solutions is buying shares from a company that has Mining Permits. This solution is regarded as the way out that does not infringe the regulation. This research background led to these following research questions: if the majority shares of a company that holds Mining Permits was taken over by another company, is the ownership of Mining Permits also transferred to the acquiring company? What are the impacts of this shares takeover to the Mining Permits that is hold by old company (that holds Mining Permits)? This research uses juridical and empirical methods. The Law Number 4 of year 2009 and Law Number 40 of year 2007 on limited company are used as primary sources.The outcome of this research indicates that although 99% of shares is taken over, the ownership of Mining Permits would not be transferred if two parties do not conduct the Mining Permits transfer process. Moreover, the administration process and transfer requirement of Mining Permits and the takeover of the shares have their own ways. Finally, the disharmony between the mining regulation and limited company regulation is occurred, especially in regulating shares takeover that makes implementation of takeover regulation on mining company difficult to be obeyed by society."

"Sektor kehutanan memiliki karakteristik yang spesifik yaitu, apabila dilakukan eksploitasi terhadap hutan, maka pemulihan fungsinya sangat sulit dan butuh waktu yang relatif lama, Kendala yang terjadi saat ini adalah pemegang IUP tidak bisa melakukan aktifitas usaha pertambangan sebelum mendapat persetujuan pemanfaaatan kawasan hutan dari Kementerian LHK. Persetujuan yang dimaksud dalam bentuk Izin Pinjam Pakai Kawasan Hutan (IPPKH). Permasalahan dalam tesis ini yaitu 1) Bagaimana pengaturan perizinan pengusahaan pertambangan mineral dan batu bara dalam kawasan hutan berdasarkan UU Pertambangan Minerba dan UU Kehutanan?; 2) Bagaimana pelaksanaan perizinanan pengusahaan pertambangan mineral dan batubara dalam kawasan hutan?. Metode Penelitian yuridis normatif digunakan dalam penelitian ini karena difokuskan pada penelitian tentang asas-asas dan teori-teori hukum yang dapat dijadikan dasar dalam harmonisasi pengaturan pengusahaan pertambangan yang memanfaatkan kawasan hutan. Data yang digunakan dalam penelitian hukum normatif adalah data sekunder berupa bahan-bahan hukum. Dari hasil penelitian dapat disimpulkan 1) Pengaturan perizinan usaha pertambangan minerba yang mengsinkronkan dengan pengaturan pengusahaan sektor lainnya seperti kehutanan, pertanahan dan lingkungan telah mengalami banyak perubahan sejak diundangkannya UU Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 Tentang Pertambangan Minerba. Perubahan terus dilakukan terutama untuk menyesuaikan pengaturan pemanfaatan dan penggunaan kawasan hutan untuk kegiatan usaha pertambangan melalui UU Nomor 3 Tahun 2020 Tentang Perubahan UU Nomor 4 tahun 2009 Tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara; 2) Harmonisasi norma hukum dalam  regulasi  di bidang pertambangan Minerba dan regulasi di bidang Kehutanan diwujudkan melalui instrumen hukum Izin Pinjam Pakai Kawasan Hutan (IPPKH) sebagai dasar penggunaan kawasan hutan untuk kegiatan pertambangan  bagi pemegang IUP......The forestry sector has specific characteristics, namely, if forest exploitation is carried out, then the restoration of its function is very difficult and takes a relatively long time. The current obstacle is that IUP holders cannot carry out mining business activities before obtaining approval for the use of forest areas from the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. The approval referred to in the form of a Borrow-to-Use Forest Area Permit (IPPKH). The problems in this thesis are 1) How are the licensing arrangements for mineral and coal mining concessions in forest areas based on the Minerba Mining Law and the Forestry Law?; 2) How is the implementation of licensing for mineral and coal mining in forest areas? The normative juridical research method is used in this study because it focuses on research on legal principles and theories that can be used as the basis for harmonization of mining concession arrangements that utilize forest areas. The data used in normative legal research is secondary data in the form of legal materials. From the results of the study, it can be concluded that 1) Mining business licensing arrangements that synchronize with other sector management arrangements such as forestry, land and the environment have undergone many changes since the enactment of Law Number 4 of 2009 concerning Minerba Mining. Changes continue to be made, especially to adjust the regulation on the utilization and use of forest areas for mining business activities through Law Number 3 of 2020 concerning Amendments to Law Number 4 of 2009 concerning Mineral and Coal Mining; 2) Harmonization of legal norms in regulations in the Minerba mining sector and regulations in the forestry sector is realized through the legal instrument of the Borrow-to-Use Forest Area Permit (IPPKH) as the basis for the use of forest areas for mining activities for IUP holders."

"ABSTRAKTesis ini membahas mengenai penerbitan izin usaha pertambangan batubaramelalui lelang berdasarkan Undang-Undang No.4 Tahun 2009 yang bertujuanuntuk menekan jual beli izin usaha pertambangan yang sering dilakukan olehpemilik IUP Batubara. Penelitian ini adalah metode kepustakaan yang bersifatpenelitian yuridis normatif yang juga didukung dengan pendekatan kasus. Hasilpenelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui penerbitan izin usaha pertambanganbatubara melalui lelang yang diatur dalam Undang Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009dan juga melihat sejauh mana hukum dapat dipatuhi oleh pemegang izin usahapertambangan tersebut. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian ditemukan bahwadibandingkan dengan undang-undang sebelumnya yaitu Undang-Undang No.11Tahun 1967, maka Undang-Undang No.4 tahun 2009 lebih baik dalam menekanadanya jual beli IUP. Namun dalam penelitian ini ditemukan juga adanyakelemahan dari sistem lelang yang menyebabkan pelaku usaha masih melakukanjual beli izin usaha pertambangan.

---

Abstract This thesis discusses the issuance of coal mining license by auction under The ActNo. 4 of 2009 which aims to suppress the sale of the mining license which is oftendone by the owner of the coal mining business license (IUP). This study is amethod of research literature that is normative juridical approach and alsosupported by the case. The results of this study was to determine the issuanceof coal mining business licenses through the auction as regulated in The Act No. 4of 2009 and also to see how far the law can be obeyed by the holderof the mining license. Based on the result of the study found, compared with theprevious legislation the Act No. 11 of 1967, the Act No. 4 of 2009 is better insuppressing the sale of IUP. But in this study also found a weakness of theauction system that caused trading of mining business license still exist."

"ABSTRAKSkripsi ini membahas bagaimana pengaturan pelaksanaan investasi usahajasa pertambangan batubara menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009Tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara (UU Minerba). Selain itu,membahas mengenai akibat hukum dari kewajiban pemegang IUP atau IUPKuntuk menggunakan perusahaan jasa pertambangan lokal dan/atau nasional. Sertaakibat hukum dari kewajiban pemegang IUP atau IUPK untuk melaksanakansendiri kegiatan penambangan dan pengolahan pemurnian. Metode yangdipergunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah pendekatan yuridis-normatif. Hasilpenelitian menunjukkan bahwa kegiatan usaha jasa pertambangan batubaradilaksanakan berdasarkan pasal 124 UU Minerba yaitu dengan mewajibkanpemegang IUP atau IUPK mengutamakan menggunakan perusahaan jasapertambangan lokal dan/atau nasional, serta mewajibkan pemegang IUP danIUPK melaksanakan kegiatan penambangan, pengolahan dan pemurnian sendiri.Akibat hukum dari ketentuan kewajiban pemegang IUP atau IUPKmengutamakan menggunakan perusahaan jasa lokal dan/nasional menyebabkanperbedaan perlakuan terhadap perusahaan jasa pertambangan lokal danperusahaan jasa pertambangan asing, dan hal ini melanggar prinsip nationaltreatment yang diakui dalam perjanjian perdagangan internasional. Adapunakibat hukum kewajiban pemegang IUP atau IUPK melaksanakan kegiatanpenambangan, pengolahan dan pemurnian sendiri menyebabkan pemegang IUPatau IUPK wajib mengakhiri atau tidak memperpanjang perjanjian kerjasamadengna perusahaan jasa pertambangan, dan hal ini berpotensi menimbulkangugatan hukum. Hasil penelitian ini secara umum menyarankan agar kegiatanusaha jasa pertambangan yang dilakukan oleh perusahaan jasa pertambangandidukung dengan regulasi yang lebih jelas tentang pengaturan perusahaan jasapertambangan asing.

---

AbstractThis thesis discusses how the implementation of Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mineraland Coal Mining (Mining Law) in regards to coal mining services business.Furthemore will discuss the legal consequences the obligation of holders of IUPor IUPK to use the services of local and/or national mining services companiesand the obligations of IUP or IUPK holders to carry out its own mining andrefining process. The method used in this study is juridical-normative approach.The results showed that coal mining services based on article 124 of Mining law,namely by requiring the IUP or IUPK holders to use of local/national miningservice companies and carry out its own mining and refining process. In regardsto the legal effects of obligation for IUP or IUPK holders to prioritize usage oflocal/national mining services companies, causing different treatment to foreigncompanies and local/national companies, and this violates the principles ofnational treatment which is recognized within international trade agreements. Inadditon, the legal effect of IUP or IUPK holders to conduct their own mining andrefining process shall terminate or not renew a cooperation agreement withmining service company, and this could potentially lead to legal action. Theresult of this research suggest in general that mining service business activitieswhich are supported by mining regulation clearer about setting foreign miningservice."

"[Pertambangan merupakan bidang usaha yang sedang diminati oleh para investor saat ini. Akan tetapi usaha pertambangan memiliki tingkat resiko tinggi (high risk), memerlukan modal besar (high cost) dan menggunakan teknologi modern (modern technology) selain itu kegiatan pertambangan juga memiliki kewajiban-kewajiban berupa Penerimaan Negara Bukan Pajak yang harus dipenuhi kepada Negara. Dan setelah kewajiban kepada Negara dipenuhi, masih ada satu kewajiban yang tidak kalah pentingnya yaitu menyelesaikan sebagian atau seluruh hak atas tanah dalam Wilayah Izin Usaha Pertambangan (WIUP) untuk kegiatan usahanya dengan pemegang hak tanah sebagaimana ditetapkan dalam Pasal 135 Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Mineral dan Batubara. Kewajiban inilah yang menjadi puncak permasalahannya, karena pengusaha tambang yang telah selesai melakukan seluruh kewajibannya dan kemudian hendak mengajukan hak atas tanah menurut ketentuan Pasal 137 Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Mineral dan Batubara tertunda oleh karena penunjukan kawasan hutan yang tidak berujung pada suatu kepastian antara Pemerintah Pusat dan Pemerintah Daerah sehingga mengakibatkan seluruh aktivitas di kantor pertanahan tidak berjalan semestinya karena tidak diketahuinya kawasan mana yang diperbolehkan untuk diberikan Hak atas Tanah dan kawasan mana yang tidak diperbolehkan. Oleh karena proses pendaftaran tanah untuk mendapatkan Sertipikat tidak dapat dipenuhi, maka Pemegang Izin Usaha Pertambangan Operasi Produksi (IUP-OP) hanya berbekal dengan Surat Pernyataan Pelepasan Hak dari Penguasa Tanah sebagai tanda bukti penguasaannya. Surat tersebut dapat digunakan sebagai alat pembuktian walaupun tidak kuat seperti halnya Sertipikat. Selain itu juga perlindungan hukum diberikan kepada pemegang IUP-OP oleh karena izin-izin terkait lainnya untuk mendukung kegiatan operasional tambangnya sudah diterbitkan oleh instansi pemerintah yang sebelumnya telah diperoleh melalui prosedur yang benar yang telah ditetapkan dalam peraturan perundang-undangan. Hasil penelitan ini bersifat preskriptif analitis karena penulis ingin menjelaskan dan memberikan solusi atau jalan keluar bagi pemegang IUP-OP menghadapi gugatan dari pihak lain. Dan diharapkan kedepannya adanya suatu hubungan kerja yang baik antara Pemerintah Pusat dan Pemerintah Daerah dalam menetapkan suatu aturan sebelum diberlakukan demi menghindari timbulnya permasalahan-permasalahan yang dapat merugikan pihak pengusaha tambang dan Negara.......Mining is the business fields that are in demand by investors today. However, mining has a high risk level, require large capital and using modern technology, and there is still have obligations in the form of tax state revenue that must be met to the State. And having fulfilled the obligation to the State, there is another obligation that still need to be fulfilled by completing some or all of the rights in land acquisition in the Wilayah Izin Usaha Pertambangan (WIUP) for its business activities with the holders of land rights as defined in Article 135 of Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mineral and Coal. That Obligation becomes the peak of mining problem, because mining entrepreneurs who have completed all of its obligations and then want to apply for the right to land pursuant to Article 137 of Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mineral and Coal was delayed because of the designation of forest areas do not lead to a certainty between the Central Government and Local Government, which had caused resulting in the entire activity in the land office does not run properly because of the uncertainty where the area is allowed to be given Right for the Land and which one is not allowed. Therefore, land registration processing to obtain Certificates can not be met, then holders of Izin Usaha Pertambangan Operasi Produksi (IUP-OP) with only a Statement of Waiver of Sovereign Land as proof of mastery. The letter still can be used as verification tool, although not as strong as Certificate. In addition, the legal protection given to holders of IUP-OP therefore permits related to support its mining operations has been issued by the government that previously had been obtained through the correct procedures stipulated in the legislation. The Results of this research was prescriptive analytical because the authors wanted to explain and provide a solution or a way out for the holder of IUP-OP facing a lawsuit from the other party. Future existence of a good working relationship between the Central Government and Local Government was expected in establishing a new rule before coming into effect in order to avoid the problems that could be rised and harm the mining operation and the State;Mining is the business fields that are in demand by investors today. However, mining has a high risk level, require large capital and using modern technology, and there is still have obligations in the form of tax state revenue that must be met to the State. And having fulfilled the obligation to the State, there is another obligation that still need to be fulfilled by completing some or all of the rights in land acquisition in the Wilayah Izin Usaha Pertambangan (WIUP) for its business activities with the holders of land rights as defined in Article 135 of Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mineral and Coal. That Obligation becomes the peak of mining problem, because mining entrepreneurs who have completed all of its obligations and then want to apply for the right to land pursuant to Article 137 of Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mineral and Coal was delayed because of the designation of forest areas do not lead to a certainty between the Central Government and Local Government, which had caused resulting in the entire activity in the land office does not run properly because of the uncertainty where the area is allowed to be given Right for the Land and which one is not allowed. Therefore, land registration processing to obtain Certificates can not be met, then holders of Izin Usaha Pertambangan Operasi Produksi (IUP-OP) with only a Statement of Waiver of Sovereign Land as proof of mastery. The letter still can be used as verification tool, although not as strong as Certificate. In addition, the legal protection given to holders of IUP-OP therefore permits related to support its mining operations has been issued by the government that previously had been obtained through the correct procedures stipulated in the legislation. The Results of this research was prescriptive analytical because the authors wanted to explain and provide a solution or a way out for the holder of IUP-OP facing a lawsuit from the other party. Future existence of a good working relationship between the Central Government and Local Government was expected in establishing a new rule before coming into effect in order to avoid the problems that could be rised and harm the mining operation and the State., Mining is the business fields that are in demand by investors today. However, mining has ahigh risk level, require large capital and using modern technology, and there is still haveobligations in the form of tax state revenue that must be met to the State. And having fulfilledthe obligation to the State, there is another obligation that still need to be fulfilled bycompleting some or all of the rights in land acquisition in the Wilayah Izin UsahaPertambangan (WIUP) for its business activities with the holders of land rights as defined inArticle 135 of Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mineral and Coal. That Obligation becomes the peak ofmining problem, because mining entrepreneurs who have completed all of its obligations andthen want to apply for the right to land pursuant to Article 137 of Law No. 4 of 2009 onMineral and Coal was delayed because of the designation of forest areas do not lead to acertainty between the Central Government and Local Government, which had causedresulting in the entire activity in the land office does not run properly because of theuncertainty where the area is allowed to be given Right for the Land and which one is notallowed. Therefore, land registration processing to obtain Certificates can not be met, thenholders of Izin Usaha Pertambangan Operasi Produksi (IUP-OP) with only a Statement ofWaiver of Sovereign Land as proof of mastery. The letter still can be used as verificationtool, although not as strong as Certificate. In addition, the legal protection given to holders ofIUP-OP therefore permits related to support its mining operations has been issued by thegovernment that previously had been obtained through the correct procedures stipulated inthe legislation. The Results of this research was prescriptive analytical because the authorswanted to explain and provide a solution or a way out for the holder of IUP-OP facing alawsuit from the other party. Future existence of a good working relationship between theCentral Government and Local Government was expected in establishing a new rule beforecoming into effect in order to avoid the problems that could be rised and harm the miningoperation and the State]"