Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Position of a state as a state established according to the laws will generate a tremendous consequences to the government in fulfilling the citizens' needs, which make the government's intervention greater. As the government role becomes greater and wider in people's daily lives, the state administrative activities also increase. In executing the state administrative activities, problems and conflicts of interest may arise and sometimes such problems lead to social unrest. Consequently, the existence of state administrative laws is very important because the main objective of the law is to keep the government's authority properly. In that case, people's interest will be protected from the abuse of authority. Decision (beschikking) is an action of the state administrative law that is often taken. The content of the decision may be used in executing the state administrative laws. Such administrative law action should not collide the laws (regulations and general principles of good governance). If a state administrative action is made in the form of a decision and it collides the laws, such decision may become the object of the state administrative court. "

"Disharmonisasi peraturan perundang-undangan pada ranah hukum keuangan publik, khususnya yang beririsan dengan BUMN dan Anak Perusahaan BUMN, merupakan isu yang mendasar dan krusial. Inkonsistensi tersebut mempengaruhi penegakan hukum. Penelitian ini menganalisis pengaruh dualisme status hukum kekayaan dan keuangan negara, dan mengenai mekanisme pengembalian serta hak penguasaan dan kepemilikan secara riil atas Dana Kerja Sama Operasional (Dana KSO) yang telah disetor ke kas negara sebagai uang pengganti tindak pidana korupsi dalam kasus tindak pidana korupsi pada Anak Perusahaan BUMN (PT PLNBB). Metode penelitian dilakukan yuridis-normatif dengan pendekatan undang-undang (statute approach) dan pendekatan kasus (case approach), serta metode kepustakaan yang didasarkan pada argumentasi melalui studi pustaka. Berdasarkan metode yang digunakan, mekanisme pengembalian kerugian pada PT PLNBB sebagai Anak Perusahaan BUMN berdasarkan Putusan Kasasi Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 3318 K/Pid-Sus/2019 dapat mengacu pada ketentuan Penerimaan Negara Bukan Pajak (PNBP) sebab hak kepemilikan dan penguasaan Dana KSO telah berada di negara. Salah satu langkah hukum yang dapat dilakukan PT PLNBB sebagai salah satu Anak Perusahaan BUMN yang dipersamakan sebagai BUMN dapat mengajukan permohonan fatwa Mahkamah Agung. Pada lain sisi, menurut teori hukum keuangan publik, analisis pengembalian tersebut dapat dikaitkan dengan ketentuan hukum perdata dan adanya kerugian yang ada pada PT PLNBB. Keabsahan Perjanjian KSO Penambangan Batu Bara antara PT PLNBB dan PT TME tidak memenuhi unsur sebab yang halal, sehingga perjanjian KSO tersebut seharusnya batal demi hukum (null and void), serta Dana KSO seharusnya dapat dikembalikan agar seperti semula dalam Kas PT PLNBB.

---

Disharmonization of laws and regulations in public finance law, especially those that cross with BUMN and BUMN Subsidiaries, is a fundamental and crucial issue. The inconsistency affects law enforcement. This study analyzes the effect of dualism on the legal status of wealth and state finances and regarding the return mechanism as well as rights of control and ownership in real terms over the Operational Cooperation Fund (Dana KSO), which has been accepted into the state treasury as a substitute for corruption in corruption cases in BUMN Subsidiary (PT PLNBB). The research method is juridical-normative with a statutory approach (statute approach) and a case approach (case approach), as well as a library method based on arguments through literature study. Based on the method used, the mechanism for returning losses to PT PLNBB as a BUMN Subsidiary based on the Cassation Judgement of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 3318 K/Pid-Sus/2019 can refer to non-tax avenue (PNBP) provisions because the ownership and control rights of the KSO Fund are already in the country. One of the legal steps PT PLNBB can take as a BUMN Subsidiary, equated to a BUMN, is to apply for a fatwa from the Supreme Court. On the other hand, according to the theory of public finance law, the analysis of these returns can be correlated to civil law provisions and losses in PT PLNBB. The validity of the Coal Mining KSO Agreement between PT PLNBB and PT TME does not fulfill the elements of lawful purpose, so the KSO Agreement should be null and void, and the KSO Funds should be able to be returned to PT PLNBB."

"ABSTRAKPasca disahkannya Pasal 87 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan, terjadi perluasan dalam pemaknaan Keputusan Tata Usaha Negara KTUN . Sehingga, perlu dipahami perbedaan definisi sebelum dan sesudah munculnya pasal tersebut. KTUN dimaknai secara sempit pada Undang-Undang tentang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara. Setelah itu, perluasan redefinisi KTUN berdampak pada wewenang PTUN karena KTUN merupakan objek sengketa di PTUN. Pembahasan terakhir akan mencoba mencari putusan-putusan PTUN yang sudah menerapkan ketentuan Pasal 87 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 dalam pertimbangan hukum hakim. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif, dengan menggunakan data sekunder serta menggunakan bahan hukum primer, sekunder dan tertier yang diperoleh dari studi kepustakaan. Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah tidak adanya penambahan wewenang PTUN pasca munculnya Pasal 87 karena pada intinya wewenang PTUN tetap mengadili dan memutus sengketa Tata Usaha Negara yang disebabkan oleh terbitnya suatu KTUN. Tetapi, saat ini PTUN harus memaknai KTUN berdasarkan Pasal 87. Selanjutnya, terdapat putusan PTUN yang telah menerapkan Pasal 87 dalam pertimbangan hukumnya yaitu pada Putusan No.45/B/2016/PT.TUN.MKS yang khususnya menggunakan dalil unsur KTUN pada Pasal 87 huruf e ldquo;berpotensi menimbulkan akibat hukum rdquo;. Pasca disahkannya Pasal 87 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan, terjadi perluasan dalam pemaknaan Keputusan Tata Usaha Negara KTUN . Sehingga, perlu dipahami perbedaan definisi sebelum dan sesudah munculnya pasal tersebut. KTUN dimaknai secara sempit pada Undang-Undang tentang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara. Setelah itu, perluasan redefinisi KTUN berdampak pada wewenang PTUN karena KTUN merupakan objek sengketa di PTUN. Pembahasan terakhir akan mencoba mencari putusan-putusan PTUN yang sudah menerapkan ketentuan Pasal 87 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 dalam pertimbangan hukum hakim. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif, dengan menggunakan data sekunder serta menggunakan bahan hukum primer, sekunder dan tertier yang diperoleh dari studi kepustakaan. Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah tidak adanya penambahan wewenang PTUN pasca munculnya Pasal 87 karena pada intinya wewenang PTUN tetap mengadili dan memutus sengketa Tata Usaha Negara yang disebabkan oleh terbitnya suatu KTUN. Tetapi, saat ini PTUN harus memaknai KTUN berdasarkan Pasal 87. Selanjutnya, terdapat putusan PTUN yang telah menerapkan Pasal 87 dalam pertimbangan hukumnya yaitu pada Putusan No.45/B/2016/PT.TUN.MKS yang khususnya menggunakan dalil unsur KTUN pada Pasal 87 huruf e ldquo;berpotensi menimbulkan akibat hukum rdquo;.

---

ABSTRACTAfter the passing of Article 87 of Law Number 30 Year 2014 on Government Administration, there is an expansion in the meaning of the State Administrative Decision KTUN . Thus, it is necessary to understand the difference of definition before and after the emergence of the article. KTUN is interpreted narrowly in the Law on State Administrative Court. After that, the redefinition extension of KTUN affects the authority of the PTUN because KTUN is a dispute object in the PTUN. The last discussion will try to find the decision of the Administrative Court which has applied the provisions of Article 87 of Law Number 30 Year 2014 in the judge 39 s judicial consideration. The research method used is normative juridical, using secondary data and using primary, secondary and tertiary legal material obtained from literature study. The conclusion of this research is the absence of additional authority of PTUN after the emergence of Article 87 because in essence the authority of PTUN still adjudicates and decides the State Administration dispute caused by the issuance of a KTUN. However, the current State Administrative Court must interpret the KTUN under Article 87. Furthermore, there is a decision of the Administrative Court which has applied Article 87 in its legal considerations, namely Decision No.45 B 2016 PT.TUN.MKS which specifically uses the KTUN elementary argument in Article 87 letter e has the potential to cause legal consequences ."

"Decision of official of the state administrative court is a written policy containing action of the state administrative law based on prevailing laws, which is concrete, individual and final, and final, and causing a legal consequence of the state administrative laws between a person/a civil legal body and the official of the state administrative court due to the issuance of the state administrative decision. To the test validity and to annul the decisions disputed in the court, two standards can be used, namely the decision disputed in the state administrative court colliding the prevailing laws and the decision disputed in the state administrative court colliding the general principles of good governance. As known, the principles of good governance are unwritten laws in implementing the governance affairs."