Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Sebelum Dan Sesudah Berlakunya Undang-Undang No. 30 Tahun 1999 Tentang Arbitrase Dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa. Suatu penyelesaian sengketa yang efektif merupakan idaman bagi setiap pihak yang terlibat dalam transaksi bisnis karena sengketa dapat menimbulkan resiko-resiko merugikan dan mengacaukan prediksi-prediksi bisnis. Meskipun biasanya penyelesaian sengketa dilakukan melalui pengadilan, namun dalam perkembangannya pengadilan dianggap kurang efektif dalam menangani sengketa-sengketa yang terjadi. Hal tersebut kemudian membawa pihak-pihak yang kurang puas kepada suatu mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa alternatif yaitu arbitrase. Suatu putusan arbitrase diperoleh melalui rangkaian proses yang didasarkan pada suatu perjanjian. Jika putusan tersebut dibatalkan maka seharusnya hal itu merupakan konsekwensi dari tidak dilaksanakannya perjanjian diantara para pihak tersebut atau tidak dipenuhinya suatu ketentuan undang-undang. Penulisan thesis ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui peranan pengadilan dalam hal pembatalan suatu putusan arbitrase dan cukup tidaknya pengaturan dasar-dasar pembatalan suatu putusan arbitrase didalam Undang-Undang Arbitrase. Metode yang digunakan adalah studi kepustakaan dan wawancara. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa apabila dilihat dari syarat-syarat pembatalan putusan arbitrase, maka pengadilan, sesudah berlakunya Undang-undang Arbitrase memiliki peranan yang jauh lebih kecil dalam hal pembatalan putusan arbitrase dibandingkan sebelum berlakunya Undangundang Arbitrase dan Undang-undang Arbitrase ternyata belum mengatur secara cukup dasar-dasar atau syarat-syarat pembatalan suatu putusan arbitrase.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
The aspect of the interconnection was one of the important aspects in the implementation of the telecommunications. Not only because the interconnection was the important point in the expansion of the service of the telecommunications service, but the interconnection also had the role that was important in creating the business competition that were effective in the telecommunications sector. Therefore, in the rule that in connection with the interconnection in many countries (including in Indonesia), the interconnection already embedded as one of the obligations that must be carried out by the organizer of the telecommunications. The interconnection of the telecommunications could be technically interpreted as the linkage between one telecommunications operator and the other telecommunications operator. In the context of this linkage, it is emerged various aspects that is in connection with the technical aspect, operational aspect and the business aspect that touch on with the interests of the regulator, the operator and the community. Therefore, in the context of the interconnection law had the dimension that in connection with the regulator's relations with the operator in the context of the specific law of the telecommunications sector, the operator's relations with the operator in the dimension of the competition law and civil (the agreement) law as well as the operator's relations with the community in the context of the consumer protection law. In these relations, often emerged the inappropriateness of the interests that finally had caused the dispute between the parties. The available interconnection rule was enabled to complete this dispute as the shape of the search and the discovery of justice for the parties. Referred in this process, there were two main issues that must get attention that is in connection with the forum (the agency) in the dispute resolution and the procedure that was passed through in the dispute resolution. As the agency that played a role as the regulator and at the same time as the agency of the dispute resolution, BRTI (Badan Regulasi Telekomunikasi Indonesia 1 Indonesian Telecommunication Regulation Agency) had the authority to join in as well as complete the dispute. In the context like this, the forum and the procedure of the dispute resolution in and by BRTI must get special attention for the sake of the effectiveness of the dispute resolution and its compatibility with the current legislation regulation.

Abstrak :
[ABSTRAK
Era reformasi telah membawa angin perubahan di segala bidang salah satunya di bidang pemerintahan daerah. Sejak dilaksankan otonomi daerah luas melalui Undang-undang Nomor 22 Tahun 1999 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah wilayah Indonesia telah mengalami banyak perubahan.Perubahan wilayah ini disebabkan adanya pemekaran daerah sebagai salah satu cara pembentukan daerah baru. Hal ini juga merupakan implementasi dari otonomi daerah sehingga masing-masing daerah berusaha untuk menjadi daerah otonom. Akibat dari kebijakan tersebut, muncullah daerah-daerah otonom baru (DOB). Tanpa disadari akibat pemekaran wilayah menyebabkan timbulnya konflik horizontal. Konflik horizontal ini memunculkan berbagai macam permasalahan baru dari persoalan pengelolaan sumber daya alam sampai dengan sengketa batas wilayah antar daerah otonom baru. Timbulnya sengketa batas wilayah antar daerah disebabkan masing-masing pihak yang bersengketa memiliki penafsiran yang berbeda terhadap wilayah yang dimilikinya.Terhadap permasalahan ini, Undang-undang Pemerintahan Daerah telah menyediakan mekanisme penyelesaiannya melalui Gubernur apabila terjadi sengketa batas wilayah antar daerah otonom baru dalam satu provinsi dan melalui Menteri Dalam Negeri apabila terjadi sengketa batas wilayah antar daerah kabupaten/kota lintas provinsi yang bersifat final. Akan tetapi dalam prakteknya, penyelesaian ini tidak memberikan rasa keadilan bagi pihak yang merasa dirugikan akibat mekanisme ini. Sehingga pihak yang merasa dirugikan akan membawa permasalahan ini ke ranah hukum yaitu melalui Mahkamah Konstitusi. Penyelesaian sengketa batas wilayah antar daerah melalui Mahkamah Konstitusi dilakukan dengan cara mengajukan permohonan pengujian undang-undang pembentukan daerah terhadap Undang-UndangDasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 yang bersifat final dan mengikat. Penelitian ini ingin menjelaskan praktek penyelesaian sengketa batas wilayah antar daerah otonom baru yang dilakukan menurut Undang-undang Pemerintahan dan melalui pengujian undang-undang di Mahkamah Konstitusi.

---

ABSTRACT
The reform era has brought a wind of change in all areas including in the field of local governance. Since the autonomous region was implemented through Act No. 22 of 1999 on Local Government regions of Indonesia have undergone many changes. Changes in the area due to the expansion region as one way the formation of new areas. This is also the implementation of regional autonomy so that each region seeks to become an autonomous area. The result of these policies, came the new autonomous areas (DOB). Unnoticed due to the onset of the conflict led to the blossoming of horizontal.This horizontal conflicts gave rise to a variety of new problems of natural resource management issues to a dispute between the territorial boundaries of the region. The onset of the dispute between the borders area due to each party to the dispute has a different interpretation of its own territory. With respect to this issue, the Act Government has provided a mechanism for settlement through the Governor in the event of a dispute between the territorial boundaries in one province and through the Ministry of Home Affairs in the event of a dispute between the borders area of district/city cross the province are final. However, in practice, this settlement does not provide a sense of fairness to the parties who feel aggrieved by this mechanism. So those who feel aggrieved will bring this issue into the realm of law, namely through the Constitutional Court. The dispute between the territory through the boundary of the Constitutional Court is carried out by means of applying for a testing area of legislation against the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945 which are final and binding. This research would like to explain the dispute resolution practice of territorial boundaries between areas is conducted according to Government legislation and through the testing laws in the Constitutional Court. ;The reform era has brought a wind of change in all areas including in the field of local governance. Since the autonomous region was implemented through Act No. 22 of 1999 on Local Government regions of Indonesia have undergone many changes. Changes in the area due to the expansion region as one way the formation of new areas. This is also the implementation of regional autonomy so that each region seeks to become an autonomous area. The result of these policies, came the new autonomous areas (DOB). Unnoticed due to the onset of the conflict led to the blossoming of horizontal.This horizontal conflicts gave rise to a variety of new problems of natural resource management issues to a dispute between the territorial boundaries of the region. The onset of the dispute between the borders area due to each party to the dispute has a different interpretation of its own territory. With respect to this issue, the Act Government has provided a mechanism for settlement through the Governor in the event of a dispute between the territorial boundaries in one province and through the Ministry of Home Affairs in the event of a dispute between the borders area of district/city cross the province are final. However, in practice, this settlement does not provide a sense of fairness to the parties who feel aggrieved by this mechanism. So those who feel aggrieved will bring this issue into the realm of law, namely through the Constitutional Court. The dispute between the territory through the boundary of the Constitutional Court is carried out by means of applying for a testing area of legislation against the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945 which are final and binding. This research would like to explain the dispute resolution practice of territorial boundaries between areas is conducted according to Government legislation and through the testing laws in the Constitutional Court. ;The reform era has brought a wind of change in all areas including in the field of local governance. Since the autonomous region was implemented through Act No. 22 of 1999 on Local Government regions of Indonesia have undergone many changes. Changes in the area due to the expansion region as one way the formation of new areas. This is also the implementation of regional autonomy so that each region seeks to become an autonomous area. The result of these policies, came the new autonomous areas (DOB). Unnoticed due to the onset of the conflict led to the blossoming of horizontal.This horizontal conflicts gave rise to a variety of new problems of natural resource management issues to a dispute between the territorial boundaries of the region. The onset of the dispute between the borders area due to each party to the dispute has a different interpretation of its own territory. With respect to this issue, the Act Government has provided a mechanism for settlement through the Governor in the event of a dispute between the territorial boundaries in one province and through the Ministry of Home Affairs in the event of a dispute between the borders area of district/city cross the province are final. However, in practice, this settlement does not provide a sense of fairness to the parties who feel aggrieved by this mechanism. So those who feel aggrieved will bring this issue into the realm of law, namely through the Constitutional Court. The dispute between the territory through the boundary of the Constitutional Court is carried out by means of applying for a testing area of legislation against the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945 which are final and binding. This research would like to explain the dispute resolution practice of territorial boundaries between areas is conducted according to Government legislation and through the testing laws in the Constitutional Court. , The reform era has brought a wind of change in all areas including in the field of local governance. Since the autonomous region was implemented through Act No. 22 of 1999 on Local Government regions of Indonesia have undergone many changes. Changes in the area due to the expansion region as one way the formation of new areas. This is also the implementation of regional autonomy so that each region seeks to become an autonomous area. The result of these policies, came the new autonomous areas (DOB). Unnoticed due to the onset of the conflict led to the blossoming of horizontal.This horizontal conflicts gave rise to a variety of new problems of natural resource management issues to a dispute between the territorial boundaries of the region. The onset of the dispute between the borders area due to each party to the dispute has a different interpretation of its own territory. With respect to this issue, the Act Government has provided a mechanism for settlement through the Governor in the event of a dispute between the territorial boundaries in one province and through the Ministry of Home Affairs in the event of a dispute between the borders area of district/city cross the province are final. However, in practice, this settlement does not provide a sense of fairness to the parties who feel aggrieved by this mechanism. So those who feel aggrieved will bring this issue into the realm of law, namely through the Constitutional Court. The dispute between the territory through the boundary of the Constitutional Court is carried out by means of applying for a testing area of legislation against the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945 which are final and binding. This research would like to explain the dispute resolution practice of territorial boundaries between areas is conducted according to Government legislation and through the testing laws in the Constitutional Court. ]

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