Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai pemenuhan ketentuan-ketentuan yang telah diatur dalam pasal 39 Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode yuridis normatif.Dari hasil penelitian ditemukan bahwa IUP Eksplorasi Timah milik PT. Bumi Palong dan IUP Operasi Produksi Batubara milik PT. Mitra Tambang Barito tidak memenuhi ketentuan pasal 39 Undang-Undang Mineral dan Batubara. Kondisi tersebut dapat mengakibatkan izin tersebut menjadi tidak sah atau dibatalkan oleh pengadilan tata usaha negara. Penelitian ini menyarankan agar pemerintah segera membuat peraturan pelaksana dalam penyusunan Izin Usaha Pertambangan.

---

The following thesis is discussing about compliance with the terms and conditions regulated in the article 39 Law No. 4 of 2009 regarding Mineral and Coal Mining against Mining Exploration License and Production Operation. The thesis used juridical norms method as research implementation method.

The result of this thesis found that tin mining exploration license owned by PT. Bumi Palong and coal mining production operation owned by PT. Mitra Tambang Tambang Barito is not comply the article 39 law regarding mineral and coal mining. The consequence of that condition is the licenses would be void by administration court. This thesis recommends the Government too soon issuing the Government Regulation as the reference in formulating Mining Business License."

"Sebelum Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara berlaku, penyelesaian sengketa antara Pemerintah dengan penanam modal (investor) diselesaikan berdasarkan kesepakatan Kontrak Karya (KK) atau Perjanjian Karya Pengusahaan Pertambangan Batu Bara (PKP2B), dimana para pihak dapat menentukan forum penyelesaian sengketa baik melalui arbitrase nasional maupun internasional atas dasar kesepakatan yang tertuang dalam perjanjian. Namun saat ini dengan berubahnya rezim kontrak menjadi rezim perizinan ketentuan penyelesaian sengketa berdasarkan ketentuan Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara, menentukan bahwa setiap sengketa yang muncul dalam pelaksanaan Izin Usaha Pertambangan (IUP), Izin Pertambangan Rakyat (IPR), atau Izin Usaha Pertambangan Khusus (IUPK) diselesaikan melalui pengadilan dan arbitrase dalam negeri sesuai dengan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan. Berubahnya rezim ini telah merubah posisi negara yang sebelumnya sejajar dalam sebuah kontrak karena bertindak sebagai subyek hukum perdata menjadi lebih tinggi sebagai regulator berada diatas perusahaan pertambangan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa ketentuan penyelesaian sengketa pada UU Minerba yang diatur pada pasal 154 menimbulkan multi tafsir dan ada kalanya justru tidak dapat dilaksanakan, karena dapat diartikan secara berbeda oleh pihak-pihak yang berkepentingan, yang berakibat kepada ketidak-pastian hukum. Sehingga untuk membangun kepastian hukum sesuai dengan kehendak dan kesepakatan subyek hukum (yang bersengketa), maka ketentuan penyelesaian sengketa pada UU Minerba perlu diperjelas dan dilakukan sinkronisasi dengan ketentuan perundang-undangan penanaman modal dan arbitrase Indonesia, baik mengenai substansi maupun rumusannya.

---

AbstractPrior to the enactment of Law Number 4 of 2009 concerning Mining and Coal, the settlement of disputes between the Government and investors resolved in the agreement of Contract of Work (CoW) and Coal Mining Exploitation Working Arrangements (CMEWA), where the parties can determine the dispute of settlement forum either through national or international arbitration. However, the current Mining dispute settlement provisions for investment pursuant to the provisions of Law Number 4 of 2009 concerning Mining and Coal, determines that any disputes that arise in the implementation of IUP, IPR, or IUPK resolved through domestic courts and arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Law. Changes in contract regime into permitting regimes has impact on changing the position of state that were previously equal in a contract to be higher in the licensing system. Thus the government's position as regulators are above the mining company. The results showed that the provision regarding dispute resolution on Mining Law, provoke to multi-interpretations that lead to legal uncertainty. Thus to build a law certainty in accordance with the will and the subject of legal agreement (the dispute), the dispute settlement provisions of the Mining Law needs to be clarified and synchronized with Indonesian Investment Law (Law Number 25 of 2007) and Arbitration Law (Law Number 30 of 1999), either on substance or formulation."

"Penelitian ini membahas mengenai beberapa permasalahan, seperti pembahasan tentang implikasi dari konsistensi pelaksanaan peraturan serta ketentuan yang berlaku disktor pertambangan terhadap perlindungan investor dalam hal pemberian izin. Kemudian persoalan tentang efisiensi dalam proses penyelesaian sengketa izin usaha wilayah pertambangan. Serta pihak yang berhak atas kuasa pertambangan di konawe Utara berdasarkan fakta hukum dan rasionlitas para majelis Hakim. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian yuridis normatif. Hasil penelitian ini adalah bahwa masalah konsistensi peraturan terhadap pemberian izin pertambangan belum tercapai, sehingga harus ada sosialisasi peraturan di tingkat pemerintah daerah dan koordinasi yang kuat antara pihak yang terkait, baik pada tingkat pusat maupun daerah. Kemudian, proses penyelesaian sengketa yang ditempuh tidak efisien bagi investor, sehingga dianjurkan adanya lembaga khusus untuk menyelesaikan permasalahan pertambangan agar lebih efektif dari segi waktu dan biayas. Berdasarkan fakta hukum dan rasionalitas para hakim, maka jelas pihak yang berhak atas kuasa pertambangan tersebut adalah PT. DIPM karena telah sesuai dengan prosedur yang ada.

---

This research discusses about several issues, such as a discussion of the implications of the consistent implementation of the rules and regulations of the mining sector in terms of investor protection licensing. Then the question of the efficiency of the dispute resolution process mining license area. As well as the party entitled to Mining in Northern Konawe based on legal facts and rationality of the Panel of Judges. This research is normative.

The results of this study is that the problem of consistency rules for granting mining licenses have not been achieved, so there should be laws and regulations at the local level and strong coordination between the parties involved, both at central and regional levels. Then, the dispute resolution process adopted inefficient for investors, so it is recommended a special agency to resolve the problem of mining to be more effective in terms of time and cost. Based on the legal facts and rationality of the judges, it is clear that the parties are entitled to power mining is PT.DIPM due in accordance with established procedures."

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai aksi korporasi akuisisi yang banyak dilakukan oleh perusahaan khususnya di sektor pertambangan belakangan ini, dimana diketahui alasan adalah sebagai cara untuk menguasai izin usaha atau mendapatkan/mengalihkan Izin Usaha Pertambangan (IUP) demi mengembangkan kegiatan usahanya. Untuk mendukung penelitian ini penulis mengambil contoh akuisisi yang dilakukan oleh PT Indonesia Coal Resources anak perusahaan PT Antam Tbk) terhadap PT Citra Tobindo Sukses Perkasa, yang mana PT ICR melakukan pengambilalihan saham perusahaan-perusahaan yang memiliki izin pertambangan. PT. CTSP pemilik IUP Eksplorasi dan IUP Operasi Produksi di wilayah Sarolangun, Jambi namun karena tidak mempunyai kemampuan untuk melaksanakan pengangkutan dan penjualan, sehingga saham yang ditempatkan PT. CTSP dijual sebanyak 100% kepada PT ICR. Berdasarkan studi contoh akuisisi tersebut penulis ingin mengetahui pengaturan mengenai pengalihan IUP serta menganalisa dalam kaitannya dengan pengambilalihan saham yang menyebabkan berubahnya pengendalian perusahaan.

---

This thesis discusses about acquisition as a corporate action, which is mostly conducted by the companies’ especially in mining sector in recent years, which is discovered the reason is as the procedure to take control of business license or acquire/transfer Business Mining License (IUP) in order to develop their business activities. Supporting this research the author take an example of acquisition that is conducted by PT. Indonesia Coal Resources (subsidiary of PT Antam Tbk) with PT Citra Tobindo Sukses Perkasa, PT ICR acquiring shares of companies that have mining license. PT CTSP as owner of IUP Exploration and Production Operation (IUP) in Sarolangun region, Jambi but, it has not got the ability to conduct the transport and sale thus, 100% shares of PT CTSP is sold to PT ICR. Based on the example of acquisition author wants to know regarding the provisions of transfer of IUP and analyzed in relation to the acquisition of shares which cause the changes of control in company."

"ABSTRAKSkripsi ini membahas mengenai perubahan pengaturan mengenai sistem pertambangan yang kemudian menimbulkan berbagai kerancuan penafsiran. Pengusahaan Pertambangan khususnya dalam bidang pertambangan batubara di Indonesia dilakukan oleh kontraktor swasta dan Pemerintah Indonesia dengan sistem konsesi berdasarkan suatu Perjanjian Karya Pengusahaan Pertambangan Batubara (PKP2B). Untuk menjalankan amanat pasal 33 Undang-Undang Dasar Tahun 1945 badan legislatif mengundangkan UU No. 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara. Dalam undang-undang tersebut diperkenalkan sistem pengusahaan pertambangan batubara dengan menggunakan Izin Usaha Pertambangan sebagai instrumennya. Fokus permasalahan dalam skripsi ini ialah kedudukan dari Perjanjian Karya Pengusahaan Pertambangan Batubara yang wajib untuk disesuaikan dengan sistem pertambangan sebagaimana diatur dalam UU No. 4 Tahun 2009. Penelitian ini bersifat yuridis normatif, menggunakan alat pengumpulan data studi dokumen. Dalam pengolahan data digunakan metode kualitatif yang menghasilkan penelitian yang bersifat deskriptif analitis. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa berdasarkan syarat sah suatu perjanjian pasal 1320 KUHPerdata dan asas-asas umum perjanjian, PKP2B merupakan suatu perjanjian yang dapat dinyatakan batal demi hukum, karena telah melanggar ketentuan pasal peraturan peralihan UU No. 4 Tahun 2009.

---

ABSTRACT

This thesis discusses the changes in regulation of the mining system which then give rise to biased interpretations. Mining exploitation, especially in the field of coal mining in Indonesia is done by a private contractor and the Government of Indonesia with the concession system based on an Coal Mining agreement (PKP2B). To carry out the mandate of Article 33 of the Constitution of 1945 the legislature enacted the Law Number 4 of 2009 regarding Mineral and Coal Mining. In the legislation introduced coal mining system by using the Mining Permit as an instrument. The problem of this thesis is the position of Coal Mining Agreement which is obligated to conform with the mining system as stipulated in Law Number 4 of 2009. This research is normative, use the data collection tool document study. In the data processing used qualitative methods which produce descriptive analytical study. The research results indicate that based on the terms of a valid treaty article 1320 of the Civil Code and the general principles of the agreement, PKP2B as an agreement can be declared null and void, because it has violated the provisions of transition on the Law Number 4 of 2009."

"Tesis ini membahas tentang penetapan status clear and clean pada izin usaha pertambangan (IUP) oleh Direktorat Jenderal Mineral dan Batubara dengan melakukan analisa dengan mempertimbangkan ketentuan-ketentuan yang terdapat dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara (UU 4/2009) dan peraturan lainnya yang terkait dengan analisa tersebut. Tesis ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang. Hasil penulisan ini memberikan kesimpulan bahwa penetapan status clear and clean pada IUP telah sesuai dengan UU 4/2009 jo. Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 55 Tahun 2010 tentang Pembinaan dan Pengawasan Penyelenggaraan Pengelolaan Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara. Dalam ketentuan tersebut, Direktorat Jenderal Mineral dan Batubara selaku wakil Pemerintah diberikan kewenangan untuk melakukan pengawasan kepada Pemerintah Daerah yang dijalankan melalui penetapan status clear and clean tersebut. Berbeda halnya dengan penerbitan sertifikat clear and clean dan menjadikan sertifikat clear and clean menjadi salah satu persyaratan tambahan dalam melaksanakan kegiatan pertambangan. Hal ini telah menciptakan akibat hukum baru yang mana tidak tercantum dalam UU 4/2009 dan bertentangan dengan ketentuan yang terdapat dalam Pasal 8 Ayat 2 Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2011 Tentang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan dan sebagai akibat daripada itu persyaratan sertifikat clear and clean dalam kegiatan pertambangan menjadi batal demi hukum. Kedua penetapan status clear and clean oleh Direktorat Jenderal Mineral dan Batubara c.q. Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral telah memperhatikan pada asas penyelenggaraan kepentingan umum, namun dalam penerbitan sertifikat clear and clean dan menjadikan persyaratan tambahan dalam kegiatan pertambangan, hal ini telah bertentangan dengan asas kepastian hukum dan asas kewenangan. Tesis ini menyarankan agar pembuat undang-undang menerbitkan peraturan yang memberikan payung hukum kepada penerbitan sertifikat clear and clean yang merupakan bagian dari penetapan status clear and clean pada izin usaha pertambangan dan selanjutnya Penulis menyarankan agar Direktorat Jenderal Mineral dan Batubara sebagai pemegang kekuasaan yang diberikan oleh undang-undang melakukan pemeriksaan secara menyeluruh yang meliputi pemeriksaan administratif, teknis pertambangan di lapangan, faktor lingkungan dan finansial, yang mana kegiatan ini merupakan yang dipersyaratkan dalam undang-undang.

---

This thesis elucidates the stipulation of the clear and clean status of the mining business license (IUP) by the Directorate General of Mineral and Coal with the consideration to the provisions of the Law No. 4 Year 2009 (Law 4/2009) concerning Mineral and Coal Mining and other regulations that are related to such law. This thesis employs normative legal as its research method, using bylaw as the approach of the analysis. This thesis concluded that the clear and clean status on the IUP has a line with the Law 4/2009 jo. Government Regulation No. 55 Year 2010 concerning the Control and Supervision of the Mineral and Coal Mining Management. In such regulation, the Directorate General of Mineral and Coal as the government representative has been granted an authorization to conduct supervision toward the Local Governement that is conducted in the way of stipulation of the clear and clean status. In contrast with the issuance of the clear and clean certificate which effecting the clear and clean certificate as one of the additional requirement to perform the mining activities. This has created new norm that is not stipulated in the Law 4/2009 and violated Article 8 paragraph 2 of the Law No. 12 concerning the Establishment of Regulations and as the concequense of the regulation, the requirement of the clear and clean certificate in the mining activities turn out to be annulled. Secondly the stipulation of the clear and clean status by the Directorate General of Mineral and Coal has included the principle of governance to the public interest, however the issuance of the clear and clean certificate and causing such certificate to be the additional requirement in the mining activities had violated the principle of legal certainty and authorization. This thesis advises that the lawmaker to issue regulations that regulate the issuance of the clear and clean certificate as part of the clear and clean process on the mining business license and moreover the Author recommends to the Directorate General Mineral and Coal as the authorized authority by the law to conduct fully examination that comprise of administrative assessment, mining technical in the field, environmental elements and financial, whereby this assessments were required by the law."

"[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 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]"

"ABSTRAKKegiatan usaha pertambangan mineral dan batubara mempunyai peranan penting dalammemberikan nilai tambah secara nyata kepada pertumbuhan ekonomi nasional danpembangunan daerah secara berkelanjutan. Mengingat hal tersebut, pengaturan danpengawasan pemerintah sangat diperlukan khususnya pengaturan kerjasama usaha jasapertambangan agar ada pembatasan dalam pengelolaan dan pengusahaan sumber dayaalam di Indonesia oleh suatu pelaku usaha sehingga tidak merugikan kepentingannegara dan masyarakat luas. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk melihat bagaimana pengaturanPemerintah dalam membatasi kerjasama dalam pelaksanaan usaha jasa pertambangan.Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode penelitian yuridisnormatif yang menginventarisasi, mengkaji dan meneliti peraturan perundang-undangandan data sekunder lainnya yang berkaitan dengan materi penelitian. Sifat Penelitian tesisini, bersifat deskriptif analitis. Analisis data yang digunakan adalah dengan metodeanalisis kualitatif. Pengaturan pemerintah dalam pembatasan kerjasama kegiatan usahajasa pertambangan khususnya dalam pengaturan pelaksanaan kegiatan penambangandan keikutsertaan anak perusahaan dan/atau afiliasinya sangat penting dilakukan untukmenghindari adanya transfer of profit, akan tetapi pemerintah sebaiknya perlumemperhatikan adanya perbedaan penjabaran ketentuan dalam UU Minerba danperaturan pelaksananya, serta peningkatan pengawasan di lapangan, sehingga dapattercapai kemandirian dan efektifitas pengusahaan di bidang pertambangan, sertamemberi nilai tambah bagi perekonomian nasional guna mencapai kemakmuran sertakesejahteraan rakyat

---

ABSTRACTBusiness activities of mineral and coal mining significantly has an important role inproviding value-added to national economic growth and development in a sustainabledistrict. Given this, government regulation and supervision is indispensable especiallyfor mining services business partnership arrangements that exist in the organization andundertaking limitation of natural resources in Indonesia by business actor effort to notharm the national interest and the wider community. The purpose of this research is tosee how the arrangement limits the government in the implementation of jointcooperation in mining services business. Research methods used in this study isnormative juridical research, study and analyze the legislation and other secondary datarelated to study materials. The nature of this thesis research is descriptive analytics. Themethod used to analize data in this research is qualitative analysis. Limitation ofgovernment regulation in mining services business activities of cooperation in particularin the implementation of regulation of mining activities and participation subsidiariesand/or affiliates is very important to avoid any such transfer of profit, but thegovernment should have notice a discrepancy explanation of the provisions in the ActMinerba and its implementing regulations, and increased supervision on the field, so asto achieve independence and effectiveness of the undertaking in the field of mining, aswell as added value to national economy and achieve prosperity and welfare of thepeople"

"Terjadi beberapa perubahan ketentuan hukum terkait dengan perizinan di bidang pertambangan di Indonesia. Salah satunya yaitu mengenai kewenangan pencabutan izin usaha pertambangan. Pada Undang-Undang No.3 Tahun 2020 terdapat perubahan ketentuan mengenai kewenangan pencabutan izin usaha pertambangan. Perubahan ini menimbulkan akibat hukum terhadap perusahaan penanaman modal asing di bidang pertambangan mineral dan batu bara di Indonesia. Skripsi ini membahas mengenai ketidakpastian hukum kewenangan pencabutan izin usaha pertambangan perusahaan penanaman modal asing yang terjadi. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode yuridis normatif. Dari hasil penelitian ditemukan bahwa perubahan kewenangan pencabutan izin usaha pertambangan yang terdapat pada Undang-Undang No. 3 Tahun 2020 dimana kewenangan pencabutan izin usaha pertambangan menjadi kewenangan pemerintah pusat memberikan jawaban atas ketidakpastian hukum mengenai kewenangan pencabutan izin usaha pertambangan penanaman modal asing. Kepastian hukum tersebut dapat meningkatkan iklim investasi di Indonesia.

---

There have been several changes in legal provisons related to mining licensing in Indonesia. One of them is regarding the authority to revoke mining business permits. According to Law No. 3 of 2020, there is a change in provisions regarding the authority to revoke mining business permits. The following thesis is discussing about the legal uncertainty of the authority to revoke mining business permits for foreign investment companies. This thesis used juridicial norms method as research implementation method. The result of this thesis found that the amandement in the authority to revoke mining business permits contained in Law No. 3 of 2020 where the authority to revoke mining business permits turned into the authority of the central government provides an answer to the legal uncertainty regarding the authority to revoke foreign investment mining license. This legal certainty can improve the investment climate in Indonesia."

"Tujuan Negara yaitu untuk memajukan kesejahteraan umum dan memajukan kesejahteraan sosial bagi seluruh rakyat Indonesia. Saat ini mengenai pertambangan mineral dan batubara diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara. Dewasa ini hampir di semua negara khususnya negara berkembang membutuhkan modal asing. Modal asing itu merupakan suatu hal yang semakin penting bagi pembangunan suatu negara. Sehingga kehadiran investor asing nampaknya tidak mungkin dihindari. Yang menjadi permasalahan bahwa kehadiran investor asing sangat dipengaruhi oleh kondisi internal suatu negara, seperti stabilitas ekonomi, politik negara, penegakkan hukum. Penanaman modal asing memberikan keuntungan kepada semua pihak, tidak hanya bagi investor saja, tetapi juga bagi perekonomian negara tempat modal itu ditanamkan serta bagi negara asal para investor. Dalam UU Minerba salah satu ketentuan yang dianggap cukup penting adalah mengenai kewajiban divestasi, yang diatur dalam Pasal 112. Divestasi adalah jumlah saham asing yang harus ditawarkan untuk di jual kepada peserta Indonesia.

---

The Purpose of Indonesia as a state is to promote the general welfare and promote social welfare for all the people of Indonesia. Currently the mineral and coal mining regulated by Law Number 4 Year 2009 Concerning Mineral and Coal Mining. Lately in all countries, especially developing countries need foreign capital.

Foreign capital is something that is increasingly important for the development of a country. So the presence of foreign investors is can’t be avoided. The presence of foreign investors is strongly influenced by the internal conditions of a country, such as economic stability, political state, the rule of law.

Foreign investment to the benefit of all parties, not only for investors but also for the economy of the country where the capital invested as well as for the country of origin of the investor. In the Mining Law one of the important regulation is about divestment, which is provided in Article 112. Divestment is the number of foreign shares should be offered to be sold to Indonesian participants."