Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"In its development of the last three years, there has been a new phenomenon in Indonesia jurisdiction; i.e. public claims made using a class action procedure. The utilization of such a procedure has been made so frequently and obtained legal forces because it has got us opportunity and justification in a variety of Indonesian legislations; among other things: law no. 23, 1997 concerning environmental management, law no. 8, 1999 regarding consumer protection and law no. 41 governing forestry followed up by a litigation procedure through the supreme court?s regulation no. 1, 2002. such a regulation has bridged the concept and legal theory which is subsequently used to execute .civil dalm procedures since there has been a shift from using an individual model to using a representative one. before the supreme court issued this regulation, courts had always' rejected collective claims on the ground that Indonesias civil law, especially section 123 of hir, a revised indonesia's law, stated that such claims could be brought up their claimants or by hiring Iavvyers. without a special authorization, however, lawyers could not represent class interest to be in session of court now, on the basis of article 4 of supreme court regulation to represent a ciass interest, the representative is not required to have this special authorization from the group he represents. social groups having the some case shoulclnot bring their case individually to prevent a recurrent case from happening. this oollective claim, class action, can be made at a lower cost so that the general public may bring their claims to court. in addition, to void mutually controversial verdicts, when each individual make his own claim, class action constitutes to be a more effident procedure. class action as a litigation procedure has its historical, social and cultural background in the common law system. therefore, class action as an effort of civil law reform in Indonesia has a tendency toward the civil law system; from legal comparison viewpoint, lt requires brillian thoughts on the part of judges in order to implement the existing laws actively; let alone, when we consider that the supreme court regulation no. 1, 2002 is but a way of transferring on America or Australian model. on the other hand, class action as a legal protection over Indonesian communities can be exercised as a social control; i.e. as social norms against deviant behaviours and their effects that include prohibitions, demands, condemnation and compensation. dispude resolution procedures with regard to compensation over unlawful deeds in class action should be prepared in detail, covering mechanism of its distribution for all members of a class including suggestions on court proving or panel to help distribute compensation more smoothly. when a compensation demand is approved, a judge isobliged to decide in detail the class grouping, compensation distribution mechanism`and steps to be taken by class representatives such as the obligation of notification. among the frequent cases are environmental function recovery, waste management improvement, pollution source eradication, compensation for the affected group and attitudinal changes among law breakers.Besides, class action as a tool of social engineering, that is, when a gap between law and social change appears, should find its solution whereas class action as a social emancipation means the equal right among various aspects of social life.based on the fact that court decision in class action is binding to all, any interest group using this procedure should help reduce administrative problems. this new phenomenon in Indonesia jurisdiction, public claims using a class action procedure, ls relevant to Frederick Calvert's theory. the people?s interest represented by a class action is in accordance with the theoiy of utilitarianism proposed by Jeremy Bentham. judges, accordingly, should make their decision on the basis of equilibrium principle between individual and collective interests as put forward by John Rawls In his theory of justice. rules are then needed to avoid a conflict of interests, between individual and collective ones. law as an umpire is indispensable."

"Di Indonesia telah cukup banyak terjadi kasus yang melibatkan konsumen sebagai korban dalam jumlah yang massal. Contoh kasus biskuit beracun yang terjadi sekitar Oktober 1989 di kota Tangerang. Tegal, Palembang dan Jambi yang dalam kasus tersebut sebanyak 141 konsumen telah menjadi korban. Demikian juga pada Juni 1994 terjadi kasus mie instan yang menyebabkan 33 konsumen sebagai korban. Kemudian pada pertengahan tahun 2001 masyarakat konsumen Indonesia sempat dihebohkan dengan adanya kasus ajinomoto berkaitan dengan penggunaan bahan baku dalam proses pembuatan produk tersebut yang tidak memenuhi kriteria halal. Dari kasus-kasus tersebut menunjukkan bahwa konsumen membutuhkan suatu alternatif penyelesaian sengketa yang dapat memberikan perlindungan hukum terhadap hak-haknya. Karena itu adanya konsep class action yang diadopsi dari negara Anglo Saxon merupakan suatu jalan keluar untuk dapat diterapkan di Indonesia. Perlindungan hukum atas hak-hak konsumen telah diatur secara jelas di dalam Undang-Undang Perlindungan Konsumen (UUPK) yang telah memasukkan 8 macam hak konsumen termasuk hak untuk menerima kompensasi, ganti rugi, dan/atau penggantian. Demikian pula pelaku usaha yang melakukan pelanggaran terhadap hak-hak konsumen, UUPK telah mengatumya secara jelas dalam bentuk tanggung jawab hukum pelaku usaha. UUPK menganut prinsip tanggung jawab hukum pelaku usaha karena kesalahan dengan 2 modifikasi, Pertama, pelaku usaha bertanggung jawab dengan praduga lalai/salah dan kedua, pelaku usaha dianggap selalu bertanggung jawab dengan beban pembuktian terbalik. Pengaturan class action sebagai suatu alternatif penyelesaian sengketa konsumen telah diatur baik dari segi materialnya maupun segi prosedur atau formilnya, tetapi masih diperlukan adanya penyempurnaan. Implementasi penyelesaian sengketa konsumen melalui prosedur class action dalam praktek peradilan mengalami perkembangan dari waktu ke waktu. Sebelum adanya UUPK para pengacara telah mencoba prosedur class action namun keadilan masih belum berpihak pada konsumen. Pengadilan yang memeriksa dan memutus perkara class action tidak mengakui gugatan class action dengan alasan belum ada dasar hukumnya, masih dibutuhkan surat kuasa khusus sesuai dengan Pasal 123 HIR dan masih terjadi salah penafsiran antara class action dengan legal standing. Setelah adanya UUPK, pengadilan mulai mengakui class action dengan pengakuan kriteria gugatan perwakilan kelompok, pengakuan wakil kelas dan anggota kelas dan adanya usulan Komisi Pemberian Ganti Rugi Apabila dikaitkan dengan Undang-Undang 14 tahun 1970 maka peradilan mulai berusaha menerapkan prinsip peradilan yang sederhana, cepat, dan biaya ringan dan hakim yang memeriksa dan memutus perkara class action telah berusaha menggali nilai-nilai hukum dalam masyarakat"

"ABSTRAKGugatan Perwakilan Kelompok adalah salah satu hak gugat untuk menyelesaikan sengketa lingkungan di Indonesia, sesuai dengan ketentuan Undang-Undang Perlindungan dan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup Nomor 32 Tahun 2009. Gugatan Perwakilan Kelompok di Indonesia memiliki mekanisme penentuan anggota kelompok yaitu Pernyataan Keluar, yang nantinya berimbas pada proses pendistribusian ganti rugi setelah gugatan dikabulkan. Berdasarkan hubungan tersebut, Penulis mencoba mengkaji masalah yang ada di Indonesia, baik dalam peraturan maupun pelaksanaannya. Kemudian dilakukan perbandingan dengan negara lain yang telah menerapkan Gugatan Perwakilan Kelompok sejak lama. Penelitian ini bersifat yuridis normatif, melalui wawancara kepada narasumber dan studi dokumen untuk dapat memberikan gambaran terhadap permasalahan yang diteliti.

---

ABSTRAKClass Actions is one of the legal standing stipulated in Law of Environmental Protection and Management No. 32 of 2009 to settle environmental disputes. Class Actions in Indonesia has opt out mechanism to determine its members, which in turn affects the process of settlement distribution after the verdict. Based on that connection, the Author tries to analyze the problems in Indonesia, in its regulations as well as the implementation. Then a comparison is made with other countries which has implemented Class Actions for longer period. This research is juridical normative, conducted through interview with a source and document study to depict the problems researched therein."