Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
Sejalan dengan perkembangan ekonorni saat ini, peran penerimaan dalam negeri bagi APBN dalam rangka pembiayaan kegiatan pemerintah maupun kaitannya dangan pelaksanaan kebijakan fiskal semakin penting. Sementara itu, sumber utama penerimaan dalam negri masih didominasi oleh penerimaan perpajakan yang dari tahun ke tahun peranannya menunjukkan kenaikan. Sistem pemerintahan di Indonesia berubah sejak diundangkannya UU No. 22 Tahun 1999 dan UU No. 25 Tahun 1999 yang efektif berlaku pada tanggal 1 Januari 2001 yang kemudian diubah dengan UU No. 32 Tahun 2004 dan UU No. 33 Tahun 2004. Perubahan yang mendasar adalah bahwa segala urusan pamerintahan kecuali kewenangan di bidang politik luar negri, pertahanan, keamanan, yustisi, moneter dan fiskal nasional, dan agama menjadi kewenangan daerah. UU No. 22 Tahun 1999 dan UU No. 25 Tahun 1999 merupakan tonggak sejarah beralihnya sistem pemerintahan dari sentralistik ke desantralistik, sesuai dengan kehendak founding fathers Indonesia dan Konstitusi UUD 1945. Esensi otonomi adalah kemandirian, yaitu kebebasan untuk berinisiatif dan bertanggungjawab sendiri dalam mengatur dan menyusun pemerintahan yang menjadi urusan rumah tangganya yang selama ini merupakan urusan pmerintah pusat, termasuk pelayanan kepada warga masyarakat. Idealnya otonomi tersebut harus dibiayai dari sumber-sumber pendapatan dari daerah itu sendiri (PAD), khususnya dari pajak daerah, karena peranan pajak daerah terhadap PAD masih dominan, yaitu 83,09% di Provinsi dan 37,72% untuk Kabupaten Kota. Berkenaan dengan hal tersebut, banyak daerah mengambil jalan pintas dengan mengoptimalkan pajak daerah sebagai satu-satunya sumber pembiayaan daerah. Apabila tidak diimbangi dengan palayanan kepada sektor pajak barsangkutan, pungutan pajak daerah akan manjadi kontraproduktif karena hanya akan dirasakan sabagai beban. Hal itu tidak sejalan dengan otonorni daarah yang bertujuan untuk mendekatkan pelayanan pemerintah kepada masyarakat. Perkembangan demokrasi saat ini menghendaki adanya wujud pelayanan pemerintah kepada masyarakat. Masyarakat kian kritis dalarn menyikapi setiap kebijakan pemerintah, apalagi berkenaan dengan suatu pungutan, khususnya pajak daerah. Rasio kenaikan penerimaan ratribusi daerah lebih tinggi dari pada pajak daerah, menunjukkan bahwa terdapat tuntutan masyarakat yang menginginkan adanya kontraprestasi (pelayanan) dari suatu pungutan. Disamping itu dari hasil penelitian daerah di Indonesia menunjukkan bahwa pada kenyataannya daerah-daerah telah berinisiatif melakukan pergeseran paradigma pajak daerah dengan memprioritaskan peruntukkan penerimaan pajak daerah untuk pelayanan kepada pajak yang bersangkutan. Sedangkan penelitian di nagara lain pun menunjukkan bahwa penerimaan pajak daerah, dioptimalkan pemanfaatannya untuk pelayanan kepada sektor pajak yang bersangkutan. Dari uraian tersebut, dapat disimpulkan bahwa paradigma pajak daarah yang semula merupakan iuran yang dapat dipaksakan tanpa adanya imbalan kontraprestasi harus diubah, dengan penegasan mangenai adanya imbalan kontraprestasi yang diprioritaskan untuk membiayai pelayanan terhadap sektor pajak daerah yang bersangkutan.

---

In line with current economic development, the role of domestic revenue in State Budget in relation to the financing of govemment activities and fiscal policy implementation has grown more important. Meanwhile, a larger part of domestic revenue comes from tax revenue which has been increasing over the years. The governmental system of Indonesia has changed since the stipulation of Law Number 22 Year 1999 and Law Number 25 Year 1999 that came into implementation on January 1?, 2001 which was later on amended by Law Number 32 Year 2004 and Law Number 33 Year 2004 respectively. One of the fundamental changes is the delegation of authority from central government to local government in all areas except for those in foreign policy, defense, national security, justice, national monetary and fiscal matters, and religious affairs. Law Number 22 Year 1999 on Regional Governance and Law Number 25 Year 1999 on Fiscal Balance between Central and Local Govemment have become a historical milestone in terms of the shift from centralized government to a more decentralized one as warranted by lndonesia's founding fathers and constitution. The fundamental nature of autonomy in unitary country is discretionary, which in this case refers to discretion to have initiative and self responsibility in managing their region?s governmental affairs which prior to the stipulation of Law Number 22 Year 1999 were the domain of central government, including public service. Ideally, regional autonomy should be financed by the region?s own revenue sources (Pendapatan Asli Daerah, PAD), especially by local taxes because they make up a significant portion of PAD, i.e. 83,09% in Provincial level and 37,72% in District/Municipal level. It is because of the above reason that many local governments resort to optimizing local taxes as the only source of regional financing. lf such measure is taken without giving something in return, e.g. improvement of services, to sectors taxed, regional taxes will not yield the desired result because they will only be viewed as additional burden, which of course is against the spirit of regional autonomy whose purpose is to bring services closer to public. The development of democracy demands a clearer manifestation of government's services to public as they grow more knowledgeable about government's policies, particularly when it comes to levies, especially local taxes. The fact that local charges shows more significant increase rate compared those of local taxes reflects public?s demand for some sort of compensation for every kind of tax/charges levied. In addition, the results of researches conducted in Indonesia indicate the shifting of local tax paradigm. Currently, local governments tend to allocate tax revenue obtained from a certain sector to measures designed to improve services in that sector. Meanwhile, similar research conducted in other countries also shows similar result. In conclusion, it can be stated that the earlier paradigm that consider local tax as something that can be coerced by government without compensation should be changed by giving more emphasis on fonns of compensation that can be used to finance services in the sector being taxed.

Abstrak :
The purpose of development rs to reach justice and prospenty in all aspects of lite by establishing amongst others small and medium companies both private and state companies. Therefore, certainty of law and adequate protection are needed to support their activities and consequently law must be obeyed by all stakeholders. Establishing a company needs capital for all its business activities. The opportunity to get capital for small and medium companies differ from/that of big companies. Since, the bigger ones have many sources to obtain capital, the smaller ones have not many options to enlarge their capital. This condition brings in balance and thus unfairness when small companies are dealing with big ones. Venture capital is one of the altematives to help small and medium companies to get proper sources of capital. The development of venture capital in indonesia is meant to open new opportunities to all business stakeholders for enlarge their companies, as they usually face many obstacles when borrow from a bank. Therefore, the existence of venture capital should be supported especially by government and business stakeholders as well as society at fast better the venture capital is growing the more small and medium companies can be helped by preserving capital for them. The system of finance order of the venture capital can be done by depositing capital into an investee company so that investment law and banking law will apply on those activities. The venture capital is based on the future prospect of the company rather than the collaterals. Consequently the venture capital has greater risk that ordinary loans, but also opens new market opportunities for the investor/lender. Administrative law has regulated the venture capital as a financing institution by enacting President's Decree No. 61/1988. However, the substantive law still uses the KUH Perdata (Civil Code). On the other hand venture capital agreements usually use standard contract which has not yet been regulated by the civil code, eventhough the regulation No. 8/1999 concern Consumers Protection has been regulated in a simple way. Therefore both our contract law as well as our corporate law need improvement. Cooperation agreement between the venture capital (venture capitalist) and the investee company is a mutual agreement, whereby the bargaining position of both the parties are not equal. The venture capitalist who has capital has a stronger position than the investee company who is the borrower whereas freedom of contract can only be applied properly when both parties have equal positions. The venture capitalist, however, tends to protect his interest (capital) by special clauses, inciuding his/her responsibilities thereby disturbing the equilibrium even further. Therefore, our laws should protect the weaker party but the govemment should also supervise and guard for such unscrupulous practices, like providing a ?black list" or "grey list" of such speciai clauses, condemning them nuii and void or voidabie (as the case may be) such as is done by the New Civil Code of the Netheriands on ?Algemene Voorwaarden".

Abstrak :
Terdapat tiga obyek yang ditelaah dalam kajian ini, yaitu: pertama, konvergensi antara hukum dan Teknologi Informasi, ketiga, implikasi Teknologi lnformasi terhadap hukum kontrak dan respon hukum terhadap lmplikasi tersebut, dan, ketiga, pembentukan Undang-Undang lnformasi dan Transaksi Elektronik Indonesia. Ketiga obyek kajian tersebut dikelompokkan dalam dua wilayah besar kajian, yaitu: pertama, wilayah kajian Sosiologi Hukum, yang mempersenyawakan antara hukum, perubahan sosial dan Teknologi lnformasi; dan, kedua, wilayah kajian hukum normatif yang mengkaji pembentukan peraturan perundang-undang dan masalah kontraktual casa kontrak elektronik. Unluk mengkaji kedua wilayah kajian tersebut secara komprehensif digunakan pendekatan interdisipliner yaitu mengharmonisasikan antara metode penelitian Sosiologi Hukum (socio-legal research) dan hukum normatif. Perspektif sosiologi Hukum yang diterapkan adalah teori Sosiologi Hukum yang mencoba mengkonvergensikan antara hukum dan parubahan sosial antara lain bid bidang perkembangan teknologi (Rose dm Ogbum), Teori Soft Technological Dterminism (Kenichi Ohmae), Teori Konstruksi Sosial (Thomas Kuhn dan Jeremy Bentham) dan Cibernetics teory (Wiener dan Bigallow). Sedangkan perspeklif ilmu hukum yang digunakan adalah Teori perundang-undangan, Teori Jenjang Norma Hukum, Teori Politik Hukum dan wacana teoretis tentang kontrak. Selain itu, masalah yang dikaji juga didekati melalui tiga pendekatan, yaitu statutory approach, conseptual approach dan comparative approach.

Abstrak :
Kebijakan pemberian bailout atau dana talangan dengan penamaan Fasilitas Pendanaan Jangka Pendek (FPJP) kepada Bank Century, sejak digulirkan tahun 2008, hingga saat ini, telah menimbulkan kontroversi di tengah masyarakat. Kontroversi itu, karena adanya pandangan bahwa kebijakan tersebut dinilai sebagai tidak layak dan menimbulkan kerugian bagi keuangan negara karena hanya menguntungkan salah satu pihak/kelompok tertentu saja. Dalam tinjauan kriminologi, kebijakan tersebut dapat dipandang sebagai kejahatan yang berada dalam ruang lingkup White Collar Crime (WCC), dilakukan oleh korporasi birokrasi negara. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, pertanyaan penelitiannya adalah: 1. Mengapa di dalam mensikapi kasus Bank Century, di antara berbagai alternatif pemecahan masalah, kebijakan yang diambil oleh KSSK adalah bailout yang ternyata dikemudian hari disalah gunakan oleh Bank Century. 2. Kebijakan baru apa yang diperlukan untuk mencegah terulangnya kasus Bank Century. Dengan pendekatan metode kualitatif, sifat kejahatan dari kebijakan FPJP Bank Century, ternyata tidak bisa hanya dilihat dari aspek pengambilan kebijakannya saja. Tetapi, perlu dilihat dari seluruh rangkaian kegiatan yang menunjukkan terjadinya kejahatan baik di Unit Operasional Bank Century, unit pengambilan kebijakan (KSSK-BI-LPS), dan unit pelaksana kebijakan (LPS). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa: 1. Peristiwa atau bentuk kejahatan di Unit Operasional Bank Century dan LPS selaku pelaksana kebijakan FPJP Bank Century, merupakan peristiwa/bentuk kejahatan yang menghimpit (beririsan) atau bersinggungan satu sama lain. Menyebabkan pengambilan kebijakan FPJP Bank Century oleh otoritas berwenang, memiliki kandungan/ sifat-sifat jahat (kriminogenik), sebagai kejahatan yang dilakukan oleh birokrasi Negara/kejahatan negara. 2. Peristiwa atau bentuk kejahatan yang terjadi di Unit Operasional Bank Century merupakan “penyebab” mengapa pengambilan kebijakan FPJP mengandung gen atau sifat-sifat kriminal. Sedangkan peristiwa/bentuk kejahatan yang terjadi di Unit Pelaksana Kebijakan, yakni LPS, adalah sebagai “akibat” yang membentuk FPJP Bank Century menjadi kejahatan Negara yang dapat dilihat secara nyata. 3. Memisahkan satu sama lain dari peristiwa/bentuk kejahatan yang terjadi pada masingmasing Unit Operasional tersebut di atas, mengakibatkan bentuk dan sifat kejahatan negara dalam pengambilan kebijakan FPJP Bank Century tidak terlihat secara sempurna/tidak kasat mata/tersamar karena peristiwa atau bentuk kejahatannya menyebar (diffusion) sesuai tugas pokok, fungsi dan kewenangan masing-masing. 4. Hal itulah yang menyebabkan pembuat kebijakan pemberian FPJP kepada Bank Century terisolasi dari pandangan bahwa kebijakan yang salah dan merugikan adalah kejahatan. 5. Untuk mencegah terulangnya perbuatan serupa, direkomendasikan perlu ada mekanisme kontrol sosial yang melibatkan peran serta masyarakat yang lebih luas, misal optimalisasi peran DPR-RI melalui pemberian izin prinsip sebelum kebijakan digulirkan.

---

The policy of providing bailouts with the naming of the Short Term Funding Facility (STFF) to the Century Bank, since it was rolled out in 2008, until now, has caused controversy among the people. The controversy was due to the view that the policy was considered inappropriate and caused losses to the state finances because it was seen to only benefit one particular party/group. In a criminological review, the controversy can be seen (assumed) as a crime within the scope of the White Collar Crime (WCC), committed by the state bureaucratic corporation. Based on this, the research questions are: 1. Why is responding to the Century Bank case, among the various alternative solutions to the problem, the policy taken by the KSSK was a bailout that was later misused by Century Bank? 2. What new policies are needed to prevent a repeat of the Century Bank case? With a qualitative method approach, the nature of crime from Century Bank's STFF needs to be seen from the whole series of activities that show the occurrence of crime both in the Century Bank Operational Unit, the policy making unit (KSSK-BI-LPS), and the policy implementation unit (LPS). The research showed that: 1. Phenomenon or forms of crime in Century Bank Operational Units and LPS as implementing Century Bank STFF policies are events/forms of crime which coincide or intersect with each other. Causing the decision making of Century Bank's STFF policy by the competent authority, containing evil / criminogenic properties, such as a crime committed by the State bureaucracy/state crime. 2. Events or forms of crime that occurred in Century Bank Operational Units are the 'causes' why STFF policymaking contains genes or criminal traits. While the events/forms of crime that occurred in the Policy Implementation Unit, namely LPS, are as a 'result' that formed the Century Bank STFF into a state crime that can be seen clearly. 3. Separating each other from the events/forms of crime that occurred in each of the Operational Units mentioned above, resulting in the form and nature of state crime in making Century Bank STFF policies not seen perfectly / invisible / disguised because events or forms of crime spread ( diffusion) according to the main tasks, functions and respective authorities. 4. These factors have caused policymakers to provide STFF to Bank Century with isolation from the view that wrong and harmful policies are crimes. 5. To prevent the recurrence of similar actions, it is recommended that there is a need for social control mechanisms that involve broader community participation, for example optimizing the role of the house of representatives (DPR-RI) through granting principle permission before the policy is rolled out.