Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Pada bidang energi dan sumberdaya alam terdapat sektor pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara merupakan energi yang tak dapat diperbaharui serta berasal dari bawah tanah, sehingga memerlukan perhatian dalam melakukan pengelelolaan. Dalam hal pengelolaan tersebut pemerintah pusat medistribusikan kewenangannya untuk melakukan pengelolaan pertambangan mineral dan batubara berdasarkan pada asas-asas otonomi daerah. Dengan didasari atas asas-asas otonomi daerah tersebut maka adanya pembagian atas urusan pemerintahan yang menjadi kewenangan antara Pemerintah Pusat, Pemerintah Provinsi dan Pemerintah Kabupaten/Kota. Kewenangan Pemerintah Daerah Kabupaten/Kota dalam pengelolaan sumberdaya alam mineral dan batubara berdasarkan pada UU No. 4 Tahun 2009 Tentang Mineral dan Batubara diberikan secara setelah berlakunya UU No. 23 Tahun 2014 Tentang Pemerintah Daerah.

---

In the field of energy and natural resources containing mineral and coal mining sector are the non-renewable energy and derived from underground, requiring attention in managing. In terms of the management of the central government authority distributed the management of mineral and coal based on the principles of local autonomy. Based on the principles of local autonomy discords by the top division of government affairs under the authority of the central government, provincial government and regency/district governments. The authority of regency/district government in natural resource management of mineral and coal base Law Number 4 Year 2009 in concern Mineral and Coal granted after the enactment of Law Number 23 Year 2014 on Regional Government."

"Skripsi ini membahas kewenangan Pemerintah dalam mengelola pertambangan mineral dan batubara setelah ditetapkannya UU No. 3 Tahun 2020 beserta peraturan pelaksananya. Penelitian ini dilakukan secara yuridis-normatif dengan mengkaji dan membandingkan perkembangan peraturan perundang-undangan terkhususnya pada sektor pertambangan mineral dan batubara. Pengelolaan pertambangan mineral dan batubara berdasarkan pada “Hak Menguasai Negara” dan bertujuan untuk mewujudkan manfaat “sebesar-besarnya kemakmuran rakyat” sebagai amanat Pasal 33 ayat (3) UUD 1945. Melalui hasil penelitian ini dapat disimpulkan bahwa disharmonisasi antara UU No. 4 Tahun 2009 dengan UU No. 23 Tahun 2014 telah diselaraskan oleh UU No. 3 Tahun 2020 melalui perubahan konsep kewenangan pengelolaan pertambangan mineral dan batubara menjadi Sentralisasi dengan mengakomodir Dekonsentrasi berdasarkan diskresi Pemerintah Pusat. Meskipun demikian Pemerintah tetap disarankan untuk mempercepat tindak lanjut pembentukan Perangkat Daerah yang mengurus pertambangan mineral dan batubara serta mengawal secara penuh proses pengalihan Izin Usaha Pertambangan.

---

The following thesis discusses the Government's authority in managing the mining of mineral and coal after the enactment of Law No. 3 of 2020 and its implementing regulations. The research was conducted in a juridical-normative manner by reviewing and comparing the development of laws and regulations, especially in the mineral and coal mining sector. The management of mineral and coal mining is based on the "State Controlling Right" and aims to realize the benefits of "the greatest prosperity of the people" as mandated by Article 33 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution. Through this research, the disharmonization issue between Law No. 4 of 2009 with Law No. 23 of 2014 has been resolved by Law No. 3 of 2020 by implementing changes in the concept of authority for managing mineral and coal mining to become Centralized by accommodating Deconcentration based on the discretion of the Central Government. However, it is strongly advised that the Government needs to accelerate the formation of Regional Apparatus that manages mineral and coal mining and fully oversees the process of transferring Mining Business Permits."

"[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.]"

"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."

"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"

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai kepastian hukum terhadap penyesuaian perjanjian kerjasama pengusahaan pertambangan batubara (PKP2B) berdasarkan Undang- Undang Nomor 4 tahun 2009 tentang Mineral dan Batubara (UU Minerba). PKP2B adalah perjanjian yang dibuat dan disepakati antara pihak kontraktor baik dari dalam negeri ataupun asing dengan pihak pemerintah Republik Indonesia dalam rangka kerjasama pengusahaan pertambangan batubara. PKP2B diatur pertama kali melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 11 tahun 1967 tentang Ketentuan Umum Pokok Pertambangan. Kelahiran UU Minerba mengharuskan agar ketentuan yang terdapat dalam PKP2B disesuaikan paling lambat 1 tahun sejak UU Minerba diundangkan. Sebelum UU Minerba lahir sistem pengelolaan pertambangan batubara dilakukan melalui perjanjian antara pemerintah dengan kontraktor, UU Minerba tidak mengenal perjanjian dalam pengelolaan pertambangan batubara. Penyesuaian PKP2B dilakukan pemerintah melalui renegosiasi dengan rancangan amandemennya, hingga saat ini proses renegosiasi telah berjalan hampir 4 tahun sejak UU Minerba diundangkan, namun belum mempunyai titik temu. Kepastian hukum atas UU Minerba menjadi dipertanyakan. Pertanyaan yang muncul adalah apa yang harus dilakukan oleh salah satu pihak (dalam hal renegosiasi disini tentunya pemerintah) yang berinisiatif mengubah suatu ketentuan dalam PKP2B sebagai suatu perjanjian yang telah disepakati apabila di lain pihak menolak. Bagaimana dengan ketentuan yang mengatur bahwa suatu sebab adalah terlarang dalam perjanjian apabila sebab tersebut bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang. Penelitian tesis ini menggunakan penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan. Hasil penelitian yang didapat adalah meskipun renegosiasi PKP2B saat ini tidak menemui kata sepakat, sebenarnya PKP2B telah dilakukan beberapa kali perubahan sebelum UU Minerba diundangkan. Salah satu alasan renegosiasi PKP2B tidak menemui kata sepakat karena posisi para pihak dalam renegosiasi dibatasi ketentuan UU Minerba yang merupakan produk dari pemerintah sebagai penguasa, dan di satu sisi pemerintah sebagai pihak dalam perjanjian PKP2B itu sendiri. Sehingga hal-hal yang dibahas dalam renegosiasi tersebut cenderung mengunci dan menutup kesempatan pihak lainnya untuk merundingkan hak dan kewajibannya. Bahwa perjanjian mengikat kedua belah pihak sebagai Undang-Undang diantara mereka yang menyepakatinya dan para pihak harus menghormati perjanjian yang telah disepakati (asas kepastian hukum dalam perjanjian yang dikenal dengan istilah Pacta Sunt Servanda).

---

This thesis discusses the legal certainty against the adjustment of coal contract of work (PKP2B) based on Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mineral and Coal Mining (Mining Law). PKP2B are agreements made and agreed between the contracting parties either domestic or foreign by the government of the Republic of Indonesia in the coal mining business cooperation. PKP2B first regulated through Law No. 11 of 1967 on General Provisions of Mining. The birth of the Mining Law requires that the provision contained in PKP2B adjusted at least 1 year from the Mining Law was enacted. Before the Mining Law was born coal mining management system given through an agreement between the government and the contractor, the Mining Law does not recognize an agreement in the management of coal mining. PKP2B adjustments made by the government through the draft amendments to the renegotiation, the renegotiation process to date has been running almost 4 years since the promulgation of the Mining Law, however, does not have any common ground. Legal certainty of the Mining Law to be questionable. The question that arises is what should be done by one of the parties (in terms of renegotiation of the government here of course) who took the initiative to change a provision in an agreement PKP2B as agreed when on the other hand refused. What about the provision which provides that a cause is forbidden in the agreement if the cause is contrary to the Act. This thesis research using normative legal research approach legislation.

The results were obtained despite the renegotiation PKP2B currently not met an agreement, actually PKP2B been done several times before the Mining Law was enacted. One reason renegotiation PKP2B not meet an agreement because the position of the parties to renegotiate, under the provisions of the Mining Law is limited which is a product of government as rulers, and on one side of the government as a party to the treaty itself (PKP2B). So things are discussed in the renegotiation tends to lock and close the other parties an opportunity to negotiate their rights and obligations. That the agreement binds both parties as the Act among those who agree and the parties must honor the agreements that have been agreed upon (the principle of legal certainty in the agreement known as pacta Sunt servanda)."

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai ketentuan kewajiban divestasi saham bagi perusahaan asing di bidang pertambangan mineral menurut UU No. 4 Tahun 2009 dan peraturan pelaksananya serta sinkronisasinya dengan hasil renegosiasi kontrak karya PT. Freeport Indonesia. Setelah melewati proses renegosiasi, pada akhirnya tercapai kesepakatan antara Pemerintah Republik Indonesia dan PT. Freeport Indonesia yang menentukan bahwa kewajiban divestasi saham PT. Freeport Indonesia adalah sebesar 30%. Dengan menggunakan jenis penelitian yuridis normatif, hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa hasil renegosiasi kontrak karya PT. Freeport tidak sinkron dengan peraturan yang berlaku pada saat itu yaitu PP No. 24 Tahun 2012, yang mengatur perusahaan asing di bidang pertambangan mineral untuk mendivestasikan sahamnya paling sedikit sebesar 51%. Setelah PP No. 24 Tahun 2012 diubah dengan PP No. 77 Tahun 2014, maka ketentuan kewajiban divestasi saham hasil renegosiasi kontrak karya PT. Freeport Indonesia dengan peraturan perundang-undangan telah sinkron.

---

This thesis examines the provisions regarding share divestment obligation for foreign mineral mining company according to Law No. 4 of 2009 and its implementing regulations, and the synchronisation with the result of contract of work renegotiation of PT. Freeport Indonesia. After going through the process of renegotiation, the Government of Republic of Indonesia and PT. Freeport Indonesia eventually reached an understanding that PT. Freeport Indonesia is obliged to divest 30% of its share.

By using normative juridical research, this study shows that the result of contract of work renegotiation of PT. Freeport Indonesia is not in sync with the applicabe regulation i.e. Government Regulation No. 24 of 2012 which requires foreign mineral mining company to divest at least 51% of its share. After Government Regulation No. 24 of 2012 is amended by Governement Regulation No. 77 of 2014, the provisions regarding share divestment obligation between the result of contract of work renegotiation of PT. Freeport Indonesia and Law No. 4 of 2009 and its implementing regulations has synchronised."

"Tesis ini membahas tentang pemberian izin pertambangan batu bara, di antaranya adalah di Kabupaten Berau. Sejak diberlakukannya Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 Tentang Pertambangan Mineral Dan Batubara dan juga Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah yang memberikan kewenangan yang luas kepada pejabat daerah untuk memberikan izin usaha pertambangan membuat penerbitan izin usaha pertambangan seperti tidak bisa dikendali. Izin usaha pertambangan yang dikeluarkan oleh pejabat setempat banyak yang melanggar peraturan perundang-undangan, seperti luas wilayah izin usaha pertambangan yang melebihi ketentuan yang ditetapkan oleh undang-undang. Akibat dari penerbitan izin usaha pertambangan yang tidak terkendali tersebut, membuat dampak yang sangat besar, seperti tumpang tindih hak pengusahaan pertambangan dengan hak pengelolaan sumber daya alam lainnya dan berbagai penolakan masyarakat sekitar terhadap penerbitan izin usaha pertambangan yang baru. Dari hal tersebut, penulis ingin mengkaji lebih dalam tentang kewenangan pemerintah daerah dalam pemberian izin pertambangan batu bara di Kabupaten Berau sebelum dan setelah berlakunya Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 Tentang Pertambangan dan Batu Bara, dan hambatan dan solusi dalam pemberian izin pertambangan batu bara di Kabupaten Berau setelah berlakunya Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 Tentang Pertambangan dan Batu Bara. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian yuridis normatif, yaitu penelitian yang menekankan pada penggunaan norma-norma hukum secara tertulis. Hasil penelitian menyarankan bahwa segera dilakukan revisi Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 Tentang Pertambangan dan Batu Bara untuk menyelaraskan dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 23 Tahun 2014 Tentang Pemerintah Daerah terkait dengan kewenangan Bupati dan Walikota yang tidak lagi berwenang menerbitkan Izin Usaha Pertambangan.

---

This thesis discusses the granting of coal mining, among which are in Berau. Since the enactment of Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mineral and Coal as well as Law No. 32 Year 2004 on Regional Government which provides broad authority to local officials to provide mining license makes mining permit such issuance could not are controlled. Mining permit issued by local officials who violate many laws and regulations, such as the area of the mining permit that exceed the provisions laid down by law. As a result of the issuance of the mining permit uncontrolled, making a huge impact, such as mining concessions overlap with the right management of natural resources and a variety of local community rejection of the issuance of new mining permit. From this, the authors wanted to examine more deeply about the local government authority in granting coal mining in Berau before and after the enactment of Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mining and Coal, and the barriers and solutions in coal mining permits in Berau regency after the enactment of Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mining and Coal. This research is a normative juridical research, ie research that emphasizes the use of legal norms in writing. Results suggest that immediate revision of Law No. 4 of 2009 on Mining and Coal to align with Law No. 23 of 2014 on Regional Government relating to the authority of regents and mayors are no longer authorized to issue Mining Permit."

"Implikasi lahirnya Undang Undang Nomor 23 Tahun 2014 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah menyebabkan perubahan kewenangan pemerintah dalam menyelenggarakan urusan pemerintahan di bidang pertambangan. Adanya perubahan kewenangan tersebut menimbulkan suatu kemungkinan terjadinya kesalahan dari pejabat pemerintah dalam melakukan kegiatan pengaturan dan pengurusan di sector pertambangan. Oleh karenanya, penulisan ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis bagaimana kewenangan gubernur dalam hal pencabutan izin usaha pertambangan (IUP) setelah berlakunya Undang Undang Nomor 23 Tahun 2014 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah dan menganalisis keabsahan dari pencabutan IUP PT Sebuku Batubai Coal (PT Sebuku) oleh Gubernur Kalimantan Selatan. Hasil dari penelitian penulis menunjukkan bahwa kewenangan gubernur dalam hal pencabutan IUP setelah berlakunya Undang Undang Nomor 23 Tahun 2014 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah telah mengalami perluasan. Gubernur memiliki wewenang untuk mencabut IUP yang wilayah pertambangannya berada di 1 (satu) daerah provinsi termasuk juga terhadap IUP yang telah diterbitkan oleh bupati/walikota Selain itu, pencabutan IUP PT Sebuku telah tidak sah karena mengandung cacat prosedur dan cacat substansi. Untuk mencegah timbulnya kesewenang wenangan pemerintah dalam mencabut IUP dikemudian hari, diperlukan adanya peningkatan pengawasan dari pemerintah pusat terhadap penyelenggaraan pengelolaan usaha pertambangan yang dilaksankan oleh pemerintah provinsi. Disamping itu, diperlukan juga adanya sanksi bagi bupati/walikota apabila melalaikan kewajibannya untuk menyerahkan dokumen IUP dalam rangka melakukan evaluasi dalam Peraturan Menteri ESDM Nomor 43 Tahun 2015. Metode penelitian dalam penulisan skripsi ini adalah penelitian yuridis normatif, dan menggunakan bahan bahan kepustakaan seperti bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier.

---

The implications of Law 23 of 2014 concerning Regional Government led to changes in government authority in carrying out government affairs in the mining sector. The change in authority has created a possibility of errors from government officials in conducting regulatory and management activities in the mining sector. Therefore, this thesis aims to analyze how the governors authority in terms of revoking a mining permits (MP) after the enactment of Law 23/2014 and analyzing the validity of the revocation of PT Sebuku Batubai Coal (PT Sebuku) MP by South Kalimantan Governor. The results of the authors research indicate that the governors authority in terms of revocation of MP after the enactment of Law Number 23 of 2014 concerning Regional Government has undergone expansion. The Governor has the authority to revoke the MP whose mining area is in 1 (one) provincial area including the MP that has been issued by the regent or mayor. In addition, revocation of PT Sebukus MP has been invalid because it contains procedural and substance defects. To prevent the arising of arbitrariness of the government in revoking MPs in the future, it is necessary to increase supervision from the central government on the implementation of mining business management carried out by the provincial government. Besides that, there is also a need for sanctions for regents or mayors if they neglect their obligation to submit MP documents in order to evaluate the Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources Regulation Number 43 of 2015. The research method in writing this thesis is juridicalnormative research, and uses library materials such as primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials."

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai kedudukan Kontrak Karya pasca disahkannya UU Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 tentang Mineral dan Batubara, dimana dengan berlakunya UU Minerba tersebut, sistem Kontrak Karya sudah tidak diberlakukan lagi karena sistem perizinan yang diberlakukan untuk berinvestasi pada bidang pertambangan di Indonesia. Dalam UU tersebut terdapat ketentuan bahwa Kontrak karya yang telah disetujui akan tetap berlaku, tetapi perlu penyesuaian. Ketentuan tersebut dinilai kontradiktif oleh beberapa kalangan. Hasil penelitian menyarankan bahwa sebaiknya dibuat peraturan pelaksana agar ketentuan yang menimbulkan pertanyaan dapat dijawab.

---

This thesis discusses about legal standing of Work of Contract after Law Number 4 Year 2009 concerning Mineral and Coal Mining is being authorized, where Work of Contract is no longer applicable for mining investment in Indonesia according to the new regulation which applies license system. It is mentioned later in the regulation that the Work of Contract that have been approved will remain valid, but with necessary adjustment. Thus, the provision is considered contradictory. This research suggests that it is better to make implementation regulation so that provisions which may raise questions can be answered."