Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Kebijakan Clear and Clean pada awalnya bertujuan untuk menata Izin Usaha Pertambangan IUP Mineral dan Batubara dikarenakan permasalahan administrasi dan kewilayahan yang ditemukan dalam proses penerbitan IUP tersebut oleh Pemerintah Provinsi, dan/atau Pemerintah Kabupaten/Kota sesuai dengan kewenangannya. Namun, seiring berjalannya waktu, ditemukan permasalahan lainnya dalam proses penerbitan IUP salah satunya adalah tidak lengkapnya dokumen lingkungan sebagai syarat untuk menjalankan kegiatan usaha pertambangan. Maka, Pemerintah setelah itu mengeluarkan Peraturan Menteri Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral yang mengatur bahwa penataan IUP dilakukan dengan mengevaluasi tata cara penerbitan IUP Mineral dan Batubara melalui 5 kriteria aspek, yakni administrasi, kewilayahan, teknis, lingkungan, dan finansial.Hasil dari evaluasi 5 kriteria aspek atas IUP ini yang selanjutnya menghasilkan status dan sertifikat Clear and Clean bagi pemegang IUP yang telah dinyatakan memenuhi 5 kriteria aspek tersebut. Sebagai kebijakan yang bertujuan untuk menata, kebijakan ini di sisi lain juga memaksakan ketaatan/kepatuhan compliance terhadap pemegang IUP untuk menaati/mematuhi 5 kriteria aspek evaluasi tersebut agar IUP nya dapat menjadi IUP Clear and Clean. Skripsi ini membahas mengenai Kebijakan Clear and Clean dengan mengaitkannya sebagai instrumen penaatan hukum lingkungan melalui pendekatan manajemen lingkungan dan tipologi kebijakannya.

---

The objective of Clear and Clean policy at the beginning is to manage the Mineral and Coal Mining Business License IUP due to the findings of administration and territoriality issues during the IUP issuance process by Provincial Government and or Local City Government based on their authority. However, other issues had also been found afterwards during the IUP issuance process, one of them is the incompletion of environmental documents which is required in order to run a mining business, thus, Government subsequently invoke a Minister of Energy dan Mineral Resources Regulation which regulates that IUP management is conducted by evaluating the IUP issuance procedure through 5 criterias, which are administration, territoriality, technical, environment, and financial.

The evaluation that is conducted on IUP through these 5 criterias hereafter resulting a Clear and Clean status and certificate for the IUP holder which declared the IUP holder has met all the 5 criterias. As a policy that aims to manage, this policy in the other hand is also forcing a compliance towards IUP holder to comply all the 5 evaluation criterias in order to have their IUP as Clear and Clean IUP. This thesis discusses Clear and Clean policy by associating it as an instrument of environmental law compliance through environmental management approach and the typology of its policy."

"Tesis ini membahas kebijakan clean and clear yang merupakan instrumen dalam menata izin usaha pertambangan mineral dan batubara yang sudah diterbitkan oleh Pemerintah Provinsi, Kabupaten/Kota. Dalam rangka menata izin usaha pertambangan pemerintah melaksanakan kegiatan Rekonsiliasi Nasional Data Izin Usaha Pertambangan yang terdiri dari inventarisasi, verifikasi dan klasifikasi. Output dari inventarisasi adalah tersedianya data KP/SIPD/SIPR yang sudah disesuaikan legalitas usaha pertambangannya menjadi IUP atau IPR. Sedangkan output dari verifikasi adalah klasifikasi IUP yang mendapat status Clean and Clean (dinyatakan tidak bermasalah atau tumpang tindih). Upaya Pemerintah dalam mengevaluasi IUP melalui kebijakan clean and clear harus diapresiasi dan didukung oleh semua pihak. Mengingat implikasi sertifikasi Clean and Clear berpengaruh terhadap kegiatan usaha pertambangan lainnya maka legalitas kebijakan Clean and Clear mutlak diperlukan. Keberadaan dasar hukum bagi tindakan pemerintah berguna untuk mencegah terjadinya penyalahgunaan wewenang. Oleh sebab itu kebijakan Clean and Clear perlu untuk dievaluasi dan diberi format hukum sesuai dengan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan.

---

This thesis describes about the clean and clear policy that is an instrument in managing the mining and coal license that has been issued by Provincial Government, District/City. In order to manage the mineral mining lisence the government commits National Reconciliation Data Mining License consists of inventarization, verification and classification.The inventarization's output is the availability of KP/SIPD/SIPR data that legality mining license has been adjusted into IUP or IPR. Meanwhile the verification's output is IUP classification that has been granted clean and clear status (declared has no problem or overlapping). The government's effort to evaluate IUP through clean and clear policy must be appreciated and supported from all of the parties. Considering the implication of clean and clear certification has an influence to the other mining activity, the legality of clean and clear policy is absolutely needed. Therefore clean and clear policies need to be evaluated and given a legal format in accordance with the provisions of the legislation."

"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."

"Batubara sangat dibutuhkan untuk pembangkitan energi di negara-negara berkembang. Namun demikian, proses pertambangan batubara sering dikaitkan dengan pemicu utama deforestasi karena metode pertambangan yang dilakukan. Indonesia sebagai negara yang memiliki hutan luas sekaligus produsen batubara utama memberlakukan kebijakan status Clean and Clear yang menandakan tidak adanya masalah kewilayahan dan administratif dalam aspek perijinan pertambangan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui pengaruh wilayah ijin usaha pertambangan batubara dengan luas kawasan hutan dengan menggunakan metode data panel fixed effect pada periode tahun 2010 hingga 2019 di 110 kabupaten di Indonesia. Hasil estimasi menunjukkan bahwa wilayah ijin konsesi pertambangan batubara berkorelasi negatif pada luas kawasan hutan. Studi merekomendasikan status Clean and Clear tidak hanya dapat diterapkan saat perijinan, namun juga dapat diterapkan pada kegiatan pasca tambang untuk dapat menjamin kegiatan reklamasi lahan telah selesai dilaksanakan.

---

Coal is needed for generating energy in developing countries. However, the coal mining process is often associated with the main driver of deforestation due to the mining method used. Indonesia as a country that has extensive forests as well as a major coal producer applies a Clean and Clear status policy which indicates that there are no regional and administrative problems in the aspect of mining permits. This study aims to determine the effect of the coal mining business permit area with a forest area using the fixed effect panel data method in the period 2010 to 2019 in 110 districts. The estimation results show that the coal mining concession area is negatively correlated with the forest area. The study recommends that the Clean and Clear status can not only be applied during licensing, but can also be applied to post-mining activities to ensure that land reclamation activities have been completed."

"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."

"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."

"Kegiatan pertambangan mineral dan batubara memicu lahirnya permasalahan terhadap lingkungan hidup. Negara, sebagai pemegang hak penguasaan negara terhadap sumber daya tambang di Indonesia telah memberikan kewajiban bagi pemegang izin pertambangan melalui peraturan perundang-undangan untuk melaksanakan reklamasi pada area bekas kegiatan tambang. Sebagai bentuk internalisasi eksternalitas akibat dari kegiatan tambang, pemegang izin selaku pelaku usaha juga wajib untuk menempatkan dana jaminan reklamasi. Dana jaminan reklamasi sebagai instrumen ekonomi lingkungan hidup, atau yang sering disebut sebagai reclamation bond/performance bond dalam berbagai tulisan ilmiah hukum lingkungan, seharusnya mampu untuk memenuhi biaya kerusakan lingkungan akibat kegiatan pertambangan. Melalui perbandingan dengan praktik di negara lain, serta wawancara dengan ahli hukum administrasi negara, ahli hukum lingkungan, pemegang izin pertambangan, danInspektur Tambang Kementerian ESDM yang terlibat langsung untuk mengawasi dana jaminan reklamasi di Indonesia, maka dalam penelitian ini dijabarkan mengenai berbagai tantangan dan permasalahan yang dihadapi dalam implementasi dana jaminan reklamasi serta penegakkan hukum atas dana jaminan reklamasi. Permasalahan tersebut antara lain, banyaknya pemegang izin pertambangan yang masih melanjutkan kegiatan tambangnya bahkan sampai izinnya telah berakhir, tetapi belum juga menempatkan dana jaminan reklamasi.

---

Mineral and coal mining activities trigger environmental problems. The state, as the holder of state control rights over mining resources in Indonesia has given obligations to holders of mining permits through statutory regulations, to carry out reclamation in areas of former mining activities. As a form of internalizing externalities resulting from mining activities, license holders as business actors are also required to place reclamation guarantee funds. A reclamation guarantee fund as an environmental economic instrument, or what is often referred to as a reclamation bond/performance bond in various environmental law scientific writings, should be able to cover the cost of environmental damage caused by mining activities. Through comparisons with practices in other countries, as well as interviews with state administrative law experts, environmental law experts, and Mining Inspectors of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources who are directly involved in overseeing reclamation guarantee funds in Indonesia, this research describes the various challenges and problems faced in implementing reclamation guarantee fund as well as law enforcement on reclamation guarantee fund. These problems include, among others, the large number of mining permit holders who continue their mining activities even after the license has expired, but have not yet placed a reclamation guarantee fund."

"[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.]"

"Pertambangan mineral dan batubara merupakan salah satu kegiatan usaha yang menguras sumber daya alam yang begitu masif dan memiliki dampak kerusakan dan pencemaran lingkungan yang tinggi. Sebagai upaya untuk mendorong akan kegiatan usaha pertambangan mineral dan batubara dapat dikendalikan agar terselenggaranya fungsi pelestarian lingkungan hidup maka dikenalkanlah kebijakan hukum instrumen ekonomi lingkungan dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2009 tentang Perlindungan dan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup. Namun demikian, instrumen ekonomi lingkungan hidup dalam undang-undang tersebut belumlah dianggap ideal bagi kegiatan usaha pertambangan mineral dan batubara yang berkelanjutan, sehingga dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 tentang Cipta Kerja (UU CK) diaturlah berbagai instrumen ekonomi lingkungan di sektor pertambangan mineral dan batubara, yaitu pengenaan royalti 0% (nol persen) bagi pelaku usaha pertambangan yang mengembangan dan memanfaatkan batubara, seperti untuk Dimethyl Ether (DME) dan Synthetic Natural Gas (SNG). Selain itu, diatur pula mengenai pengenaan pertambangan batubara sebagai barang kena pajak penghasilan (PPN) 10% (sepuluh persen). Penelitian ini melakukan kajian terdapat pelaksanaan kebijakan instrumen ekonomi lingkungan setelah ditetapkan UU CK dengan studi kasus di PT Bukit Asam Tbk. Tujuan penelitian ini ialah untuk menguji efektifitas kebijakan instrumen ekonomi lingkungan. Metode penelitian ini yaitu metode kualitatif dengan analisis data deksriptif-analitis. Hasil penelitian ini pengenaan royalti 0% (nol persen) bagi pelaku usaha pertambangan yang mengembangan dan memanfaatkan batubara dan pengenaan pertambangan batubara sebagai barang kena pajak penghasilan (PPN) 10% (sepuluh persen) belum efektif, serta PT Bukit Asam hanya menerapkan sebagian instrumen ekonomi lingkungan model perencanaan pembangunan dan kegiatan ekonomi, pendanaan lingkungan, dan insentif/disinsentif.

---

Mineral and coal mining is one of the business activities that drains natural resources so massively and has a high impact on environmental damage and pollution. In an effort to encourage mining and coal business activities to be controlled so that the function of environmental conservation can be implemented, a policy on environmental economic law instruments was introduced in Law Number 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management. However, the environmental economic instruments in the law are not yet considered ideal for sustainable mineral and coal mining business activities, so Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation (UU CK) regulates various environmental economic instruments in the mineral and coal mining, namely the imposition of a 0% (zero percent) royalty for mining business actors who develop and utilize coal, such as for Dimethyl Ether (DME) and Synthetic Natural Gas (SNG). In addition, it also regulates the imposition of coal mining as income taxable goods (VAT) 10% (ten percent). This study examines the implementation of the environmental economic instrument policy after the CK Law was enacted with a case study at PT Bukit Asam Tbk. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of the environmental economic policy instrument. This research method is a qualitative method with descriptive-analytical analysis of the data. The results of this study are the imposition of 0% (zero percent) royalties for mining business actors who develop and utilize coal and the imposition of coal mining as income taxable goods (VAT) 10% (ten percent) has not been effective, and PT Bukit Asam only applies some economic instruments. environmental development planning model and economic activity, environment, and incentives/disincentives."

"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."