Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"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"

"[Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 merupakan undang-undang yang dapat dikatakan cukup kontroversial bagi pertambangan mineral logam, karena merubah alur industri pertambangan logam tanah air menjadi tidak hanya mencakup kegiatan pertambangan semata, akan tetapi juga diwajibkan untuk perusahaan-perusahaan pertambangan melakukan kegiatan pengolahan dan pemurnian di dalam negeri dalam kurun waktu hanya 5 (lima) tahun saja. Keterbatasan infrastruktur di daerah-daerah, ketidaktersediaan listrik, serta kompleksnya birokrasi yang melingkupi perluasan bidang usaha lintas sektor antara pertambangan (hulu) dengan pemurnian (hilir) membuat hal tersebut menjadi terlalu sulit diwujudkan, ditambah lagi dengan inkonsistensi Pemerintah yang menetapkan kewajiban divestasi saham bagi Perusahaan Pertambangan Penanaman Modal Asing, dari 20% (dua puluh persen) di tahun 2010, menjadi 51% (lima puluh satu persen) di tahun 2012. Selain kedua hal tersebut, pada tahun ketiga sejak Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 diberlakukan, Pemerintah telah melarang kegiatan ekspor mineral mentah, akan tetapi mencabutnya kembali dan menetapkan ketentuan ekspor dengan tambahan birokrasi yang semakin panjang, sehingga menyebabkan investor pertambangan penanaman modal asing kehilangan waktu dan sulit dalam merealisasikan amanah Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tersebut. Penulisan ini bertujuan untuk menampilkan fakta kesulitan-kesulitan yang dialami oleh PT. X selaku perusahaan penanaman modal asing dalam bidang pertambangan mineral nikel oleh karena kebijakan pertambangan yang tidak cukup berimbang.

---

Law Number 4 Year 2009 could be considered as a controversy for the metal mineral mining businesses, since it has changed the scheme of domestic metal mineral mining industry to not only contains mining but also obliged the mining companies to conduct mineral smelting and processing domestically within period of only 5 (five) years. The limitation of infrastructure facilities within the counties, unavailability of electrical source, and the complexity of bureaucracies that facilitates such cross borders industrial sectors between the mining (mainstream industries) , and the smelting and processing (downstream industries) has caused such policy too unreasonable to be accomplished, moreover the inconsistency of the Government whom has stipulated the divestment terms for the foreign investing mining company, from 20% (twenty percent) in 2010, and re-stipulated it to became 51% (fifty one) percent within 2012. Apart from those two main issues herein, by the third year since the enactment of Law Number 4 Year 2009, the Government has banned the raw mineral export activities, however revoked such laws and enacted a new regulation of raw mineral export policies with additional/ longer bureaucracy’s mechanism process, therefore it has put the foreign mining investors within difficult circumstances to actualize the mandate of the laws itself. This Thesis intends to display the problematic facts that experienced by PT. X as a foreign investing mining company in nickel mining by the insufficient fairness of mining policies.;Law Number 4 Year 2009 could be considered as a controversy for the metal mineral mining businesses, since it has changed the scheme of domestic metal mineral mining industry to not only contains mining but also obliged the mining companies to conduct mineral smelting and processing domestically within period of only 5 (five) years. The limitation of infrastructure facilities within the counties, unavailability of electrical source, and the complexity of bureaucracies that facilitates such cross borders industrial sectors between the mining (mainstream industries) , and the smelting and processing (downstream industries) has caused such policy too unreasonable to be accomplished, moreover the inconsistency of the Government whom has stipulated the divestment terms for the foreign investing mining company, from 20% (twenty percent) in 2010, and re-stipulated it to became 51% (fifty one) percent within 2012. Apart from those two main issues herein, by the third year since the enactment of Law Number 4 Year 2009, the Government has banned the raw mineral export activities, however revoked such laws and enacted a new regulation of raw mineral export policies with additional/ longer bureaucracy’s mechanism process, therefore it has put the foreign mining investors within difficult circumstances to actualize the mandate of the laws itself. This Thesis intends to display the problematic facts that experienced by PT. X as a foreign investing mining company in nickel mining by the insufficient fairness of mining policies.;Law Number 4 Year 2009 could be considered as a controversy for the metal mineral mining businesses, since it has changed the scheme of domestic metal mineral mining industry to not only contains mining but also obliged the mining companies to conduct mineral smelting and processing domestically within period of only 5 (five) years. The limitation of infrastructure facilities within the counties, unavailability of electrical source, and the complexity of bureaucracies that facilitates such cross borders industrial sectors between the mining (mainstream industries) , and the smelting and processing (downstream industries) has caused such policy too unreasonable to be accomplished, moreover the inconsistency of the Government whom has stipulated the divestment terms for the foreign investing mining company, from 20% (twenty percent) in 2010, and re-stipulated it to became 51% (fifty one) percent within 2012. Apart from those two main issues herein, by the third year since the enactment of Law Number 4 Year 2009, the Government has banned the raw mineral export activities, however revoked such laws and enacted a new regulation of raw mineral export policies with additional/ longer bureaucracy’s mechanism process, therefore it has put the foreign mining investors within difficult circumstances to actualize the mandate of the laws itself. This Thesis intends to display the problematic facts that experienced by PT. X as a foreign investing mining company in nickel mining by the insufficient fairness of mining policies., Law Number 4 Year 2009 could be considered as a controversy for the metal mineral mining businesses, since it has changed the scheme of domestic metal mineral mining industry to not only contains mining but also obliged the mining companies to conduct mineral smelting and processing domestically within period of only 5 (five) years. The limitation of infrastructure facilities within the counties, unavailability of electrical source, and the complexity of bureaucracies that facilitates such cross borders industrial sectors between the mining (mainstream industries) , and the smelting and processing (downstream industries) has caused such policy too unreasonable to be accomplished, moreover the inconsistency of the Government whom has stipulated the divestment terms for the foreign investing mining company, from 20% (twenty percent) in 2010, and re-stipulated it to became 51% (fifty one) percent within 2012. Apart from those two main issues herein, by the third year since the enactment of Law Number 4 Year 2009, the Government has banned the raw mineral export activities, however revoked such laws and enacted a new regulation of raw mineral export policies with additional/ longer bureaucracy’s mechanism process, therefore it has put the foreign mining investors within difficult circumstances to actualize the mandate of the laws itself. This Thesis intends to display the problematic facts that experienced by PT. X as a foreign investing mining company in nickel mining by the insufficient fairness of mining policies.]"

"Birokrasi yang berbelit dan regulasi yang menghambat investasi masih menjadi keluhan klasik dunia usaha, pemerintah merilis Peraturan Presiden (Perpres) Nomor 91 Tahun 2017 tentang Percepatan Pelaksanaan Berusaha dengan harapan dapat memperlancar perizinan untuk pengusaha termasuk bagi usaha mikro, kecil dan menengah (UMKM) setelah mendapat persetujuan penanaman modal. Salah satu sektor yang rentan dengan urusan birokrasi dan regulasi adalah sektor energi dan sumber daya mineral. Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral mempunyai tugas menyelenggarakan urusan pemerintahan di bidang energi dan sumber daya mineral untuk membantu presiden dalam menyelenggarakan pemerintahan negara berdasarkan peraturan Presiden nomor 68 tahun 2015 tentang Organisasi dan Tata Kerja Kementerian ESDM melaksanakan deregulasi dan debirokratisasi sektor energi dan sumber daya mineral khususnya penyederhanaan perizinan pertambangan mineral dan batubara untuk mendongkrak investasi dan menjadikan Indonesia sebagai negara terkemuka dalam kemudahan berusaha. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif, melalui studi kepustakaan, dengan tipologi penelitian preskriftif kualitatif dengan menyandingkan data-data yang diperoleh dikaitkan dengan peraturan perundang-undangan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa, penyederhanaan proses perizinan di sektor energi dan sumber daya mineral mampu mendongkrak minat para investor menanamkan modalnya di Indonesia. Bahkan, kepercayaan para investor ini mendapat apresiasi dari Bank Dunia (World Bank) dengan menempatkan Indonesia ke peringkat 72 di tahun 2018 dalam Kemudahan Berusaha (Ease of Doing Business/EODB) di Indonesia. Peringkat tersebut merupakan keberhasilan tersendiri setelah pada tahun 2017 hanya menempati posisi ke-91 atau naik 19 peringkat.

---

Convoluted bureaucracy and regulation that hinder investment are still the classic complain in the business world, releasing the presidential regulation number 91 of 2017 on Acceleration of Doing Business, the government expects to ease permits for entrepreneurs such as micro, small and medium enterprises after acquiring capital investment agreement. One of the sectors susceptible to bureaucratic and regulatory matters is the energy and mineral resources sector. The Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources has the task of administering government affairs in the field of energy and mineral resources to assist the President in conducting state government based on the presidential regulation number 68 of 2015 on the Organization and Work Procedures of the Ministry of ESDM carrying out deregulation and debureaucratization of energy and mineral resources sector, especially the simplification of mineral and coal mining license to heighten investment and to make Indonesia a leading country in the ease of doing business. This research is conducted using normative legal research methodology through the study of literature with the typology of qualitative prescriptive research by placing the acquired data side by side and then associating them with the legislation. The result of the research shows that the simplification of the licensing process in the energy and mineral resources sector is capable of heightening investors interest in investing their capital in Indonesia. The credence of the investors received appreciation from the World Bank by placing Indonesia 72nd in the 2018 ranking of the Ease of Doing Business (EODB) in Indonesia. The rank was a success because it was increased by 19 points in comparison with Indonesias 91st position in 2017."

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai perbandingan tentang aspek investasi di bidang pertambangan di Indonesia dengan menganalisis Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 1967 tentang Ketentuan-Ketentuan Pokok Pertambangan dan Undang- Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara sebagai bahan perbandingan hukum investasi. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah pendekatan yuridis normatif, sedangkan metode analisis datanya adalah metode kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menyarankan bahwa pemerintah harus segera menetapkan Peraturan Pemerintah yang mengatur mengenai investasi pertambangan mineral dan batubara dengan mempertimbangkan aspek kepentingan nasional sebagai unsur utama dalam menerapkan segala kebijakan mengenai pertambangan mineral dan batubara.

---

The following thesis is critizing about investment aspects in Indonesian mining sector. The particular issue of this thesis will appear in a form of comparison between Law No. 11 of 1967 regarding Foremost Terms of Mining and Law No.4 of 2009 regarding Coal and Mineral Mining. The thesis used juridical norms approach as research implementation method and also assessment of several qualitative data. The end result of this thesis recommends the Government to soon issuing the Government Regulation which stipulates further about investment related to coal and mineral mining by considering national interest aspect as the main element."

"Mineral dan Batubara sebagai salah satu komoditas industri yang berasal dari kekayaan alam Indonesia sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang-Undang tentang Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara merupakan pokok bahasan utama dalam studi ini. Produk legislasi yang mengatur tentang Mineral dan Batubara tidak berdiri sendir tetapi juga berkaitan dengan undang-undang lain meliputi Undang-Undang tentang Energi, Undang-Undang tentang Ketenagalistrikan, Undang-Undang tentang Penanaman Modal, Undang-Undang tentang Pengelolaan dan Perlindungan Lingkungan Hidup serta peraturan delegasi lainnya. Permasalahan terjadi ketika Pemerintah menerbitkan paket kebijakan untuk mengamankan ketahanan energi nasional melalui instrumen Domestic Market Obligation yang ditetapkan secara berkala tiap tahun oleh Menteri Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral guna mengatur jumlah kebuthan batubara dalam negeri, patokan harga, skema pemasokan termasuk kebijakan denda yang akan diterapkan. Studi ini akan membahas permasalahan mengenai perkembangan bentuk regulasi sanksi bagi produsen batubara yang tidak dapat memenuhi kewajiban DMO. Selain itu, riset ini juga akan mengulas analisis yuridis pengaturan sanksi bagi produsen batubara yang tidak dapat memenuhi kewajiban DMO. Selanjutnya akan dibahas pula mengenai dampak kebijakan DMO dan pelarangan ekspor batubara terhadap negara lainnya. Hasil studi menunjukkan bahwa perkembangan bentuk regulasi sanksi bagi produsen batubara yang tidak dapat memenuhi kewajiban DMO cukup signifikan. Pemberian sanksi yang dilakukan tidak melalui asas pembentukan peraturan perundang-undangan yang baik karena penetapan Keputusan Menteri ESDM tentang Sanksi DMO tidak memiliki alas hukum yang kuat. PP tentang Penetapan Jenis PNBP mensyaratkan instrumen hukum yang digunakan adalah UU, PP, Kontrak, atau Peraturan Menteri. Dampak kebijakan DMO dan pelarangan ekspor batubara mendapat respon penolakan karena kebijakan proteksionis ini dilakukan mendadak dan tanpa terencana sebelumnya. Selain itu kebijakan tersebut juga ditetapkan tanpa adanya konsultasi publik sehingga memicu banyak penolakan dari pemangku kepentingan.

---

Minerals and Coal, as one of the industrial commodities derived from Indonesia's natural wealth as stipulated in the Law on Mineral and Coal Mining, is this study's main subject matter. The products of legislation governing Minerals and Coal do not stand but also relate to other laws, including the Law on Energy, the Law on Electricity, the Law on Investment, the Law on Environmental Management and Protection and regulations. Other delegates. The problem occurred when the government issued a policy package to secure national energy security through the Domestic Market Obligation instrument, which was set periodically every year by the Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources to regulate the amount of domestic coal blindness, price benchmarks, supply schemes including fine policies to be implemented. This study will discuss the issue of the development of the form of sanctions regulation for coal producers unable to meet DMO obligations. In addition, this research will also review a juridical analysis of sanctions arrangements for coal producers unable to meet DMO obligations. Furthermore, it will also be discussed the impact of the DMO policy and the ban on coal exports to other countries. The study results show that developing a form of sanctions regulation for coal producers who cannot meet DMO obligations is quite significant. The provision of sanctions carried out is not through the principle of forming good laws and regulations because the determination of the Decree of the Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources on DMO Sanctions does not have a strong legal basis. Government Regulations on The Non-Tax State Income Types require that the legal instruments used are Laws, Government Regulations, Contracts, or Ministerial Regulations. The impact of the DMO policy and the ban on coal exports was rejected because this protectionist policy was carried out suddenly and without prior planning. In addition, the policy was also established without public consultation, triggering much resistance from stakeholders."

"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."

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai penerbitan dan pencabutan Izin Usaha Pertambangan (IUP), khususnya terkait dengan tumpang tindih IUP yang dapat terjadi baik antar IUP maupun dengan sektor lain seperti sektor kehutanan. Hal tersebut perlu segera diselesaikan karena dapat menimbulkan ketidakpastian dalam penanaman modal dibidang pertambangan di Indonesia. Hasil penelitian yuridis normatif menunjukkan bahwa penerbitan IUP dilakukan setelah pemohon atau peserta lelang mendapatkan Wilayah Izin Usaha Pertambangan dan memenuhi syarat untuk mendapatkan IUP. Sedangkan pencabutan IUP dapat dilakukan jika pemegang IUP tidak memenuhi kewajiban dalam peraturan perundang-undangan. Terkait dengan pencabutan IUP PT Ridlatama Tambang Mineral (PT RTM) hal tersebut telah tepat, karena PT RTM tidak memenuhi kewajibannya untuk memiliki Izin Pinjam Pakai Kawasan Hutan untuk melakukan kegiatan pertambangan di kawasan hutan. Untuk mencegah timbulnya tumpang tindih IUP, dibutuhkan peningkatan koordinasi antara Pemerintah dan Pemerintah Daerah, baik yang sifatnya sektoral maupun yang sifatnya lintas sektoral. Selain itu peningkatan pengawasan oleh Pemerintah terhadap penerbitan dan pencabutan IUP yang dilakukan oleh Kepala Daerah di Indonesia juga diperlukan.

---

This essay examines the issuance and revocation of Mining Business License (IUP), specifically related to the overlapping IUP which can occur either between IUP or with other sectors like forestry. The overlapping of IUP need to be resolved immediately seeing that it may cause uncertainty for investments in Indonesia’s mining industry. Normative juridical research results show that the issuance of IUP can be conducted after the applicant or bidders get Mining Business License Area and eligible as IUP holder. While the revocation of IUP can be done if the IUP holder does not fulfill the obligations under the laws and regulations. Related to the revocation of IUP PT Ridlatama Tambang Mineral (PT RTM), such decision was right, because PT RTM does not fulfill its obligation to have Izin Pinjam Pakai Kawasan Hutan to conduct mining activities in forest areas. To prevent the overlapping Mining Business License, an increased coordination between Government and Local Government is needed, be it sectorial or cross-sectorial in nature. Furthermore, the government must establish oversight towards the issuance and revocation of mining licenses by Regent and Governor in Indonesia."

"Revisi Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 menjadi Undang-Undang Nomor 3 Tahun 2020 seolah mereduksi kewenangan pemerintah daerah. Sebanyak 19 pasal yang telah direvisi yang bertalian dengan kewenangan pemerintah daerah hampir seluruh kewenangan pemerintah daerah ditarik menjadi kewenangan pusat, di dalam penelitian ini akan menyajikan persoalan mengenai ketengan pemerintah daerah pada urusan mineral batubara kepada pemerintah pusat. kewenangan pemerintah daerah provinsi maupun kabupaten/kota pada urusan pertambangan, merupakan urusan yang bersifat concurrent yang dalam penanganannya melibatkan antara pemerintah pusat dan pemerintah daerah, menarik sebagian besar kewenangan dan tidak melibatkan pemerintah daerah tentu berpotensi berimplikasi negatif dalam hal penyelenggaraan urusan pertambangan mineral dan batubara, misalnya, mencakup dana bagi hasil, tanggung jawab sosial perusahaan, resistensi masyarakat setempat akibat kurang jelasnya mekanisme keberatan atau penolakan mereka terhadap kehadiran penambangan di daerahnya, lemahnya isu pengawasan dan pembinaan dalam mengurangi tingkat risiko sosial dan lingkungan, dan lebih penting memangkas jarak antara pemerintah dan masyarakat. .....The revision of Law Number 4 of 2009 to Law Number 3 of 2020 revised 135 articles from the 217 articles contained in Law Number. 4 of 2009, in detail there are 73 articles that have been added, 51 articles have been amended, and 11 articles have been deleted. As many as 19 revised articles relating to the authority of local governments, almost all local government authorities have been withdrawn to the central authority, leaving room for delegation of part of the authority of the Central Government to provincial local governments for the issuance of IPR and SIPB, in this study will present the implications of regional city district governments. no longer have space of authority in coal mineral mining affairs. the authority of the provincial and district / city governments in mining affairs, is a concurrent affair which in its handling involves the central government and regional governments, withdrawing most of the authority and does not involve local governments, of course, has the potential to have negative implications in terms of carrying out mineral and coal mining affairs. for example, it includes profit-sharing funds, corporate social responsibility, local community resistance due to unclear mechanisms for their objection or resistance to the presence of mining in their area, weak issues of supervision and guidance in reducing the level of social and environmental risk, and more importantly reducing the distance between the government and Public. 

"