Implications of Entry Juridical Law Number 4 of 2009 Concerning Mineral and Coal Mining on Contract for Works

摘要

The birth of the idea of ??the government to change the system management and operation of the system of mining in Indonesia Contract of Work (COW) into a Mining Business License (IUP) as mandated in the Act No. 4 of 2009 on Mineral and Coal is one effort to increase the acceptance of the state of the sector mining. Under the provisions of Article 169 Mining Law , that the COW that existed before the birth of this Act remains ‘ recognized ‘ , but not later than 1 (one) year should be ‘ adjusted ‘ , except for state revenue . The meaning of ‘ recognized ‘ in that provision is related to the subject of the law and the period of validity, whereas the meaning of ‘ customized’ associated with the substance or agreement clauses. With the exception of the State revenues to be adjusted norms would lead to ambiguity, because the provision does not coincide with the birth of the spirit of the Mining Law is one to increase people’s income, Mandated state region and in Article 2 as Mining Law. KK one substance directly related to State revenues are royalties that amount between 1 % to 2 %, in proportion to such obligations are not comparable with the social and ecological risks to be borne by the government of the Republic of Indonesia. Despite the Government Regulation No. 45 Year 2003 on State revenues Non- tax rates prevailing in the ministry of energy and mineral resources which determine the amount of the royalty rates between 3.25 % to 4 % , however, due to hit the provisions of Article 169 Mining Law , the provision cannot be applied to KK , as an exception in the adjustment . Thus the constitutional provisions contrary to the principle of justice as mandated in Article 33 of the Constitution 45 which is a manifestation of a grain of Pancasila 5 precepts of social justice for all Indonesian people that maintain a balance between the rights and obligations and is able to do justice. Therefore, to provide legal certainty on whether or not the Contract of Work adapted as an effort to maximize the utilization of natural resources (SDA) is reserved for the greatest welfare of the people as mandated in Article 33 (3) 45 Constitution, there should be a judicial review of the provisions of article 169 b Mining Law to the Constitutional Court. Keywords: Contract of Work, State Revenue