Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Tesis ini membahas penyelesaian sengketa kepemilikan hak atas tanah asrama TNI Angkatan Darat sehubungan adanya putusan Perkara Kasasi Tata Usaha Negara Nomor 259 K/TUN/2004 yang mengabulkan permonan kasasi Komandan Detasemen Zeni Bangunan 4/VI Pontianak namun menyatakan gugatannya tidak dapat diterima. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan metode penelitian kepustakaan. Hasil penelitian menyarankan tindakan pengamanan mencegah sengketa dengan cara pendaftaran haknya dan merawat serta mempergunakan tanah sesuai peruntukannya dan sengketa segera diselesaikan untuk menghindari masalah atau sengketanya semakin komplek; sengketa diselesaikan melalui Badan Pertanahan Nasional atau Pengadilan; Badan Pertanahan Nasional dalam melaksanakan tugas hendaknya sesuai dengan asasasas umum pemerintahan yang baik dan para penegak hukum dalam menyelesaikan sengketa memperhatikan hukum dan keadilan.

---

This thesis explores the settlement of disputes over land ownership rights of the Army hostel due to the decision of the State Administrative Appeal Case Number 259.K/TUN/2004 which granted cassation Building Engineer Detachment Commander 4/VI Pontianak but noted his complaint could not be accepted. This research is a normative juridical literature research method. The results suggest security measures to prevent disputes by way of registration and care as well as their rights to use land according to its allocation and disputes to be resolved to avoid the more complex issues or disputes; disputes settled through the National Land Agency or the Court, the National Land Agency in carrying out duties in accordance with the principle should be- general principle of good governance and law enforcement officials in solving the dispute concerned the law and justice."

"[Tesis ini membahas mengenai “Analisa Hukum Perjanjian Perdamaian Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Jual Beli Obyek Hak Atas Tanah“. Penelitian ini bersifat deskriptif dengan metode yuridis normatif yaitu dengan melihat bagaimana bentuk perjanjian perdamaian pada penyelesaian sengketa perdata dalam sistem peradilan di Indonesia. Perdamaian sebagai salah satu bentuk perjanjian, Pasal 1851KUHPerdata mengatur definisi perdamaian “suatu perjanjian dengan mana kedua belah pihak, dengan menyerahkan, menjanjikan atau menahan suatu barang, mengakhiri suatu perkara yang sedang bergantung atau pun mencegah timbulnya suatu perkara“. Dimasukannya prosedur perdamaian ke dalam sistem peradilandidasarkan pada Pasal 130 HIR/154 Rbg dimana dijelaskan hakim wajibmenganjurkan para pihak yang berperkara untuk menempuh prosedur perdamaian terlebih dahulu. Perjanjian perdamaian sah jika dibuat secara tertulis. Perjanjian perdamaian yang ditetapkan dalam suatu formalitas atau bentuk cara tertentu, dinamakan perjanjian formil. Dalam perjanjian formil kesepakatan atau perjanjian lisan semata-mata antara para pihak yang berjanji belum melahirkan kewajiban pada pihak yang berjanji untuk menyerahkan sesuatu, melakukan atau berbuatsesuatu atau tidak melakukan dan tidak berbuat sesuatu. Apabila salah satu pihak wanprestasi maka pihak yang dirugikan dapat menempuh prosedur eksekusi;This thesis discusses “Legal Analysis on Peace Agreement for Dispute Resolution of Land Right Object Sale and Purchase“. This is a descriptive study that uses juridical normative method, which sees what form does the Peace Agreement for civil dispute settlement in Indonesia’s justice system take. Peace as a form of agreement, on act 1851 of Civil Code, mentioned that the definition of peace agreement is “an agreement, with which both party, by giving, pledging or holding an object, ending a dispute that haven’t been solved or even prevent a dispute“. The inclusion of peace procedure in justice system is based on act 130 of HIR/154 Rbg whereas elaborated that a judge is required to advise the disputing parties to go through peace procedure first. Peace Agreement is valid if made in writing. Peace Agreement which set in a specific formal way is called a formalagreement. In a formal treaty or oral agreement solely between the parties have yet bore any liability on the pledging party, be it to give, do, commit or not to do something. If one of the parties is negligent, the other party, which is aggrieved, said party can take execution procedures., This thesis discusses “Legal Analysis on Peace Agreement for Dispute Resolutionof Land Right Object Sale and Purchase“. This is a descriptive study that usesjuridical normative method, which sees what form does the Peace Agreement forcivil dispute settlement in Indonesia’s justice system take. Peace as a form ofagreement, on act 1851 of Civil Code, mentioned that the definition of peaceagreement is “an agreement, with which both party, by giving, pledging orholding an object, ending a dispute that haven’t been solved or even prevent adispute“. The inclusion of peace procedure in justice system is based on act 130 ofHIR/154 Rbg whereas elaborated that a judge is required to advise the disputingparties to go through peace procedure first. Peace Agreement is valid if made inwriting. Peace Agreement which set in a specific formal way is called a formalagreement. In a formal treaty or oral agreement solely between the parties haveyet bore any liability on the pledging party, be it to give, do, commit or not to dosomething. If one of the parties is negligent, the other party, which is aggrieved,said party can take execution procedures.]"

"Amicus curiae atau friends of court merupakan praktek yang sudah ada sejak jaman Romawi Kuno dan dalam sistem common law. Atas persetujuan pengadilan, amicus memberikan informasi mengenai area-area hukum di luar keahlian pengadilan atau informasi hukum tidak memihak yang tidak diketahui oleh pengadilan, sehingga hakim dapat memberikan putusan yang berkualitas. Sekarang ini, amicus curiae juga berpartisipasi dalam proses pemeriksaan di pengadilan-pengadilan internasional, seperti ICJ, ITLOS, ICC, NAFTA, ICSID dan WTO, juga pengadilan-pengadilan dalam negeri dengan sistem civil law. Masuknya amicus curiae dan diterimanya amicus brief dalam proses penyelesaian sengketa di WTO, menuai protes keras dari negara-negara berkembang anggota WTO. Amicus curiae dianggap telah mengganggu hak negara anggota, dalam hal sebagai pihak berperkara pada proses penyelesaian sengketa. Amicus curiae juga dianggap mempengaruhi kedaulatan negara anggota. Tujuan penulisan ini adalah untuk mengetahui bagaimana sebenarnya posisi amicus curiae dalam penyelesaian sengketa di WTO dan terhadap negara-negara berkembang anggota WTO. Dari hasil penelitian diketahui bahwa amicus curiae dalam penyelesaian sengketa di WTO, semata-mata merupakan pemenuhan kebutuhan Panel untuk melaksanakan objective assessment dalam proses pemeriksaan setiap kasus yang diajukan kepadanya. Hak negara anggota sebagai pihak berperkara tidak akan terganggu karena amicus curiae bukan pihak dan tidak akan pernah dapat menjadi pihak dalam proses penyelesaian sengketa di WTO. Berkaitan dengan hal tersebut, amicus curiae juga tidak berpengaruh terhadap kedaulatan negara anggota. Diketahui juga bahwa dengan perkembangan amicus curiae yang ada sekarang, ternyata amicus curiae tidak memberikan banyak manfaat dalam proses penyelesaian sengketa di WTO.

---

Amicus curiae or friends of the court was a practice known in ancient Roman times and in the common law system. The amicus, at the court's discretion, provided information on areas of law beyond the expertise of the court or impartial legal information that was beyond the court?s notice, so for the judge may make a quality judgment. Now, amicus curiae also participated in proceeding before the international courts, such as the ICJ, ITLOS, ICC, NAFTA, ICSID and WTO, as well as the domestic courts with civil law system. The participation of amicus curiae and receipt of amicus briefs in the dispute settlement process in the WTO, has lead the protests from developing countries members of the WTO. Amicus curiae is considered to interfere with the rights of members, in the respect of a party in the dispute settlement proceeding. Amicus curiae is also considered to affect the sovereignty of member states. The purpose of this paper is to determine how the actual position of the amicus curiae in the WTO dispute settlement and toward the developing countries of WTO members. The survey revealed that the amicus curiae in the WTO dispute settlement, merely the fulfillment of the Panel to make the objective assessment of the matters before it. The member states right as the party shall not be interfered because amicus curiae is not the party and will never be as the party to the dispute settlement in the WTO. In this regard, amicus curiae also does not affect the sovereignty of member states. With the development of amicus curiae, amicus curiae turns not provide much benefit in the process of dispute settlement in the WTO. Rights of member states as parties litigant will not be interrupted because an amicus curiae is not a party and will never be a party to the dispute settlement process in the WTO. Please also note that with the development of the present amicus curiae, amicus curiae turns not provide much benefit in the process of dispute settlement in the WTO."

"Pendanaan perusahaan menggunakan utang dapat berujung kepada financial distress apabila debitor tidak mampu membayar utang sehingga mengakibatkan kepailitan. Agar menghindari perebutan harta debitor dalam hal ada beberapa kreditor yang menagih piutangnya secara bersamaan, diatur prosedur kepailitan dalam peraturan perundang-undangan. Perselisihan utang dalam rapat verifikasi utang kepailitan dapat diselesaikan dengan renvoi prosedur. Tulisan ini menganalisis bagaimana pengaturan mengenai proses kepailitan khususnya prosedur penyelesaian perkara perselisihan jumlah piutang dalam tahap pencocokan piutang berdasarkan Undang-Undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang serta bagaimana pertimbangan hukum Majelis Hakim dalam perkara Renvoi Prosedur no. 04/Renvoi Prosedur/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby. Tulisan ini disusun dengan metode yuridis normatif yang merupakan penelitian dengan cara meneliti bahan kepustakaan serta data sekunder. Dari penelitian ini ditemukan bahwa dalam proses kepailitan, khususnya pencocokan utang, apabila ada pihak yang tidak setuju dengan hasil rapat dapat mengajukan keberatan kepada pengadilan yang kemudian akan diproses melalui renvoi prosedur. Dalam Putusan Renvoi Prosedur No. 04/Renvoi Prosedur/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby ditemukan bahwa majelis hakim renvoi prosedur tidak hanya telah melanggar asas pemeriksaan sederhana kepailitan, namun juga melampaui kewenangan yang dimiliki oleh majelis hakim renvoi prosedur sebagai forum yang menyelesaikan perselisihan dalam kepailitan yang bersifat non-sengketa.

---

Corporate financing using debt can lead to financial distress if the debtor is unable to repay the debt, resulting in bankruptcy. To prevent the scramble for the debtor's assets when multiple creditors are simultaneously claiming their receivables, bankruptcy procedures are regulated in the legislation. Disputes over debt in bankruptcy debt verification meetings can be resolved through the renvoi procedure. This writing analyzes the regulations regarding the bankruptcy process, particularly the procedures for resolving disputes over the amount of debts in the debt reconciliation phase based on Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations. It also discusses the legal considerations of the Panel of Judges in the case of Renvoi Procedure No. 04/Renvoi Procedure/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby. This paper is composed using a normative juridical method, which involves researching literature and secondary data. From this research, it was found that in the bankruptcy process, especially in debt reconciliation, if there is a party dissatisfied with the meeting's results, they can file an objection with the court, which will then be processed through the renvoi procedure. In Decision Renvoi Procedure No. 04/Renvoi Procedure/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby, it was discovered that the panel of judges in the renvoi procedure not only violated the principle of a simple bankruptcy examination but also exceeded the authority held by the renvoi procedure panel of judges as a forum for resolving non-dispute disputes in bankruptcy."

"Pendanaan perusahaan menggunakan utang dapat berujung kepada financial distress apabila debitor tidak mampu membayar utang sehingga mengakibatkan kepailitan. Agar menghindari perebutan harta debitor dalam hal ada beberapa kreditor yang menagih piutangnya secara bersamaan, diatur prosedur kepailitan dalam peraturan perundang-undangan. Perselisihan utang dalam rapat verifikasi utang kepailitan dapat diselesaikan dengan renvoi prosedur. Tulisan ini menganalisis bagaimana pengaturan mengenai proses kepailitan khususnya prosedur penyelesaian perkara perselisihan jumlah piutang dalam tahap pencocokan piutang berdasarkan Undang-Undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang serta bagaimana pertimbangan hukum Majelis Hakim dalam perkara Renvoi Prosedur no. 04/Renvoi Prosedur/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby. Tulisan ini disusun dengan metode yuridis normatif yang merupakan penelitian dengan cara meneliti bahan kepustakaan serta data sekunder. Dari penelitian ini ditemukan bahwa dalam proses kepailitan, khususnya pencocokan utang, apabila ada pihak yang tidak setuju dengan hasil rapat dapat mengajukan keberatan kepada pengadilan yang kemudian akan diproses melalui renvoi prosedur. Dalam Putusan Renvoi Prosedur No. 04/Renvoi Prosedur/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby ditemukan bahwa majelis hakim renvoi prosedur tidak hanya telah melanggar asas pemeriksaan sederhana kepailitan, namun juga melampaui kewenangan yang dimiliki oleh majelis hakim renvoi prosedur sebagai forum yang menyelesaikan perselisihan dalam kepailitan yang bersifat non-sengketa.

---

Corporate financing using debt can lead to financial distress if the debtor is unable to repay the debt, resulting in bankruptcy. To prevent the scramble for the debtor's assets when multiple creditors are simultaneously claiming their receivables, bankruptcy procedures are regulated in the legislation. Disputes over debt in bankruptcy debt verification meetings can be resolved through the renvoi procedure. This writing analyzes the regulations regarding the bankruptcy process, particularly the procedures for resolving disputes over the amount of debts in the debt reconciliation phase based on Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations. It also discusses the legal considerations of the Panel of Judges in the case of Renvoi Procedure No. 04/Renvoi Procedure/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby. This paper is composed using a normative juridical method, which involves researching literature and secondary data. From this research, it was found that in the bankruptcy process, especially in debt reconciliation, if there is a party dissatisfied with the meeting's results, they can file an objection with the court, which will then be processed through the renvoi procedure. In Decision Renvoi Procedure No. 04/Renvoi Procedure/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby, it was discovered that the panel of judges in the renvoi procedure not only violated the principle of a simple bankruptcy examination but also exceeded the authority held by the renvoi procedure panel of judges as a forum for resolving non-dispute disputes in bankruptcy."

"Pendanaan perusahaan menggunakan utang dapat berujung kepada financial distress apabila debitor tidak mampu membayar utang sehingga mengakibatkan kepailitan. Agar menghindari perebutan harta debitor dalam hal ada beberapa kreditor yang menagih piutangnya secara bersamaan, diatur prosedur kepailitan dalam peraturan perundang-undangan. Perselisihan utang dalam rapat verifikasi utang kepailitan dapat diselesaikan dengan renvoi prosedur. Tulisan ini menganalisis bagaimana pengaturan mengenai proses kepailitan khususnya prosedur penyelesaian perkara perselisihan jumlah piutang dalam tahap pencocokan piutang berdasarkan Undang-Undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang serta bagaimana pertimbangan hukum Majelis Hakim dalam perkara Renvoi Prosedur no. 04/Renvoi Prosedur/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby. Tulisan ini disusun dengan metode yuridis normatif yang merupakan penelitian dengan cara meneliti bahan kepustakaan serta data sekunder. Dari penelitian ini ditemukan bahwa dalam proses kepailitan, khususnya pencocokan utang, apabila ada pihak yang tidak setuju dengan hasil rapat dapat mengajukan keberatan kepada pengadilan yang kemudian akan diproses melalui renvoi prosedur. Dalam Putusan Renvoi Prosedur No. 04/Renvoi Prosedur/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby ditemukan bahwa majelis hakim renvoi prosedur tidak hanya telah melanggar asas pemeriksaan sederhana kepailitan, namun juga melampaui kewenangan yang dimiliki oleh majelis hakim renvoi prosedur sebagai forum yang menyelesaikan perselisihan dalam kepailitan yang bersifat non-sengketa.

---

Corporate financing using debt can lead to financial distress if the debtor is unable to repay the debt, resulting in bankruptcy. To prevent the scramble for the debtor's assets when multiple creditors are simultaneously claiming their receivables, bankruptcy procedures are regulated in the legislation. Disputes over debt in bankruptcy debt verification meetings can be resolved through the renvoi procedure. This writing analyzes the regulations regarding the bankruptcy process, particularly the procedures for resolving disputes over the amount of debts in the debt reconciliation phase based on Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations. It also discusses the legal considerations of the Panel of Judges in the case of Renvoi Procedure No. 04/Renvoi Procedure/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby. This paper is composed using a normative juridical method, which involves researching literature and secondary data. From this research, it was found that in the bankruptcy process, especially in debt reconciliation, if there is a party dissatisfied with the meeting's results, they can file an objection with the court, which will then be processed through the renvoi procedure. In Decision Renvoi Procedure No. 04/Renvoi Procedure/2015/PN.Niaga.Sby, it was discovered that the panel of judges in the renvoi procedure not only violated the principle of a simple bankruptcy examination but also exceeded the authority held by the renvoi procedure panel of judges as a forum for resolving non-dispute disputes in bankruptcy."

"[Dalam melakukan pedaftaran tanah dan penegakan hukum di bidang pertanahan, terdapat lembaga pemerintah non departemen yaitu BPN. BPN memiliki tugas menyelenggarakan beberapa fungsi yaitu perumusan kebijakan nasional di bidang pertanahan, pembinaan dan pelayanan administrasi umum di bidang pertanahan, Dalam praktiknya, tidak jarang terjadi terdapat kasus terbitnya sertipikat oleh BPN atau kantor pertanahan setempat terhadap tanah yang masih berstatussengketa di pengadilan.Tesis ini membahas mengenai sengketa tanah antara Taily Aida dan Hendra Santoso dengan Kepala Kantor Pertanahan Kotamadya Surabaya yang berakibat pada pembatalan sertipikat hak milik nomor 669/ Dukuh Pakis atas nama pihak lain yaitu Suladi Abdus Shomad yang diterbitkan oleh Kantor Pertanahan Kotamadya Surabaya diatas tanah milik Taily Aida dan Hendra Santoso yang masih menjadi objek sengketa di pengadilan. Salah satu faktor penyebab timbulnya kasus ini adalah adanya kesalahan dari pihak administrasi kantor pertanahan kotamadya Surabaya. Penelitian menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan tipologi eksplanatoris dan preskriptif. Hasil penelitian menyimpukan bahwa timbulnya sertipikat hak milik atas nama pihak lain diatas tanah yang masih menjadi objek sengketa di pengadilan telah melanggar pasal 45 ayat (1) huruf e Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 24 Tahun 1997 serta langkah hukum yang dapat dilakukan oleh Taily Aida dan Hendra Santoso yaitu mengajukan permohonan kembali hak atas tanah dengan sertipikat hak milikkepada Kantor Pertanahan Kotamadya Surabaya atas nama Taily Aida dan Hendra Santoso.;In conducting the registration of land and law enforcement in the land sector, there is a non-departmental government agency called BPN. BPN has the task of organizing several functions, namely the formulation of national policy in the field of land, development and general administrative services in the area of land,in practice, there are rare cases of issuance of certificates by BPN or local land office on the ground are still a dispute in the court. This thesis is illustrate about the land dispute between Taily Aida and Hendra Santoso against the Head of the Land Office of Surabaya City that resulted in the cancellation of property rights certificate number 669 / Dukuh Pakis on behalf of other parties, namely Suladi Abdus Shomad issued by the Land Office on land owned by the municipality ofSurabaya Taily Aida and Hendra Santoso, who is still the object of dispute in court. One of the factors causing this case is mistakenness on the part of municipal land office administration Surabaya. Research using normative juridical method with typology of explanatory and prescriptive. Results of the study concluded that the incidence of property rights certificate on behalf of another party on the ground that they become the object of dispute in court has violated article 45 paragraph (1) letter e of the Government Regulation No. 24 of 1997 aswell as the legal steps that can be performed by Taily Aida and Hendra Santoso reapply land rights with certificates of property rights to the Land Office on behalf of the municipality of Surabaya as Taily Aida and Hendra Santoso., In conducting the registration of land and law enforcement in the land sector,there is a non-departmental government agency called BPN. BPN has the task oforganizing several functions, namely the formulation of national policy in thefield of land, development and general administrative services in the area of land,in practice, there are rare cases of issuance of certificates by BPN or local landoffice on the ground are still a dispute in the court. This thesis is illustrate aboutthe land dispute between Taily Aida and Hendra Santoso against the Head of theLand Office of Surabaya City that resulted in the cancellation of property rightscertificate number 669 / Dukuh Pakis on behalf of other parties, namely SuladiAbdus Shomad issued by the Land Office on land owned by the municipality ofSurabaya Taily Aida and Hendra Santoso, who is still the object of dispute incourt. One of the factors causing this case is mistakenness on the part ofmunicipal land office administration Surabaya. Research using normative juridicalmethod with typology of explanatory and prescriptive. Results of the studyconcluded that the incidence of property rights certificate on behalf of anotherparty on the ground that they become the object of dispute in court has violatedarticle 45 paragraph (1) letter e of the Government Regulation No. 24 of 1997 aswell as the legal steps that can be performed by Taily Aida and Hendra Santosoreapply land rights with certificates of property rights to the Land Office on behalfof the municipality of Surabaya as Taily Aida and Hendra Santoso.]"

"Salah satu sengketa yang sering terjadi berkaitan dengan status atau kepemilikan tanah adalah sengketa antara masyarakat dengan pemerintah. Pemerintah dalam upaya mensejahterakan rakyat membutuhkan tanah sebagai sarana yang dapat digunakan untuk kepentingan umum. Tanah yang digunakan dapat berupa tanah berupa aset dari daerah tersebut atau merupakan tanah milik masyarakat. Sewajarnya, masyarakat yang bersedia memberikan tanahnya untuk dijadikan sarana umum akan memperoleh ganti rugi dari pihak pemerintah atas penggunaan tanah tersebut, namun seringkali hal tersebut tidak berjalan dengan baik. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah mengenai status hukum tanah dan kekuatan alat bukti kepemilikan tanah yang menjadi obyek sengketa serta penerapan aspek keadilan dan kepastian hukum dalam putusan pengadilan berkaitan dengan masalah sengketa tanah antara ahli waris dengan pemerintah kota Tangerang Selatan. Penulisan tesis ini menggunakan metode pendekatan yuridis normatif dan metode preskriptif analitis. Dari hasil penelitian diperoleh kesimpulan bahwa status tanah yang menjadi obyek sengketa adalah tanah girik dan belum bersertipikat, sedangkan alat bukti yang digunakan oleh pihak pemerintah adalah berdasarkan surat pernyataan aset yang didasarkan atas surat keterangan desa. Dalam hal ini girik mempunyai kekuatan pembuktian yang lebih kuat jika dibandingkan dengan surat pernyataan aset tersebut dan putusan-putusan dalam pengadilan telah sesuai dengan ketentuan perundang-undangan yang berlaku.

---

One of the frequent disputes relating to the status or land ownership is disputed between the community and the government. Government in an effort to prosper the people in need of land as a means that can be used for public purposes. Land used may be in the form of land or assets of the area is land owned by the community. Naturally, people who are willing to give their land to be used as a common means will receive compensation from the government for the use of the land, but often it is not going well. The problem in this research is the legal status of the land and the strength of evidence of land ownership became disputed and implementation aspects of justice and rule of law in the judgment with regard to the problem of land disputes between heirs with South Tangerang city government. This thesis using normative juridical approach and prescriptive analytical methods. From the research we concluded that the status of the disputed land is the land girik and yet bersertipikat, while the evidence used by the government is based on a statement of assets based on the letter of the village. In this case the strength of evidence girik have stronger when compared to the waiver of these assets and court rulings in accordance with the provisions of the applicable legislation."

"Peneliatian ini membahas mengenai pelaksanaan putusan Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) dalam sengketa rokok kretek antara Indonesia dengan Amerika Serikat pada forum World Trade Organziation (WTO). Sengketa ini terjadi akibat regulasi teknis yang diterapkan Amerika Serikat melarang peredaran serta penjualan rokok kretek di wilayahnya, namun tidak melarang rokok menthol yang merupakan produk domestiknya. Penyelesaian sengketa rokok kretek ini melalui prosedur yang diatur dalam Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU). Panel yang memeriksa sengketa ini mengeluarkan laporan akhirnya yang menyatakan bahwa regulasi teknis Amerika Serikat melanggar TBT Agreement, sehingga direkomendasikan untuk disesuaikan dengan ketentuan-ketentuan WTO. Amerika Serikat mengajukan banding atas hal ini, namun Appellate Body kembali menguatkan laporan Panel tersebut. Laporan akhir dari Appellate Body kemudian diadposi oleh DSB. Amerika Serikat sebagai pihak yang kalah mengajukan permohonan reasonable period of time guna melaksanakan putusan DSB. Namun setelah tenggang waktu berakhir rekomendasi putusan DSB tetap tidak dilaksanakan Amerika Serikat, sehingga Indonesia mengajukan permohonan retaliasi kepada DSB.Penelitian ini menggunakan analisa yuridis normatif, yaitu penelitian yang difokuskan untuk mengkaji penerapan kaidah-kaidah atau normanorma dalam hukum positif. Sebagaimana karakteristik penelitian hukum, untuk memecahkan suatu masalah dan sekaligus memberikan preskripsi mengenai apa yang seyogianya, menggunakan bahan-bahan hukum primer dan bahan-bahan hukum sekunder.Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa pelaksanaan implementasi dan rekomendasi putusan DSB seharusnya dilaksanakan sesuai dengan ketentuan DSU. Menjamin dilaksanakannya implementasi dan rekomendasi putusan DSB sebenarnya merupakan kewajiban seluruh anggota WTO, terutama para pihak yang telah mempercayakan penyelesaian sengketanya melalui DSB. Dalam sengketa rokok kretek ini, Indonesia telah melakukan upaya hukum yang seharusnya dan telah sesuai dengan prosedur dan kaidah WTO. Indonesia mengajukan pemohonan kepada DSB untuk retaliasi dalam bentuk penangguhan konsesi tarif dan kebijakan lainnya terhadap Amerika Serikat, disertai tuntutan ganti rugi sebesar US$50.5 juta.

---

The focus of this study is the implementation of adopted Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) ruling in the clove cigarettes dispute between Indonesia and United States of America (USA) in the World Trade Organization forum. The dispute caused by technical regulation of USA which affecting the production and sale of clove cigarettes in its territory, yet excluded domestic product menthol cigarettes. The dispute settlement through the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) procedure. The report of the Panel decided that USA technical regulation is inconsistent with TBT Agreement, and shall adjust with WTO agreements . USA appeal the report of the Panel, but Appellate Body uphold the report of the Panel. The report of the Appellate Body then adopted by the DSB. USA as loosing party requested the reasonable period of time to comply the DSB ruling. However USA has yet to comply the implementation of adopted recommendations or rulings of the DSB even expiry of the reasonable period of time, so that Indonesia requested for retaliation to the DSB.

This study uses literature study approach, which focus on rules or norms in the positive law. As a legal study characteristics, to solve an issue and provide a prescription, this study uses primary legal materials and secondary legal materials.

The result of this study shows that the implementation of adopted recommendations or rulings of the DSB shall be complied according to the DSU. Ensure the implementation of adopted recommendation or rulings of the DSB is the responsibility of WTO members, especially the parties who commited their dispute settlement to DSB. In this clove cigarettes dispute, Indonesia has reached an appropriate legal acts accordance to the rules and procedures of the WTO. Indonesia has requested the DSB for the suspending concessions or other obligations to USA for bring a measure into conformity with the same level of US$50.5 millions."