Home / Recent News / Judicial Review, Expert Witness Call State-Owned Enterprises Must Be Managed More Responsibly

Judicial Review, Expert Witness Call State-Owned Enterprises Must Be Managed More Responsibly

Merdeka.com – A Professor of Constitutional Law from Parahyangan Catholic University, Koerniatmanto Soetoprawiro found State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) must be managed under the principles of kinship, not prioritizing capital. In his opinion, the existence of Article 2 paragraph (1) a and b, has generated biased meaning.

This was conveyed by Koerniatmanto when he testified in a follow-on trial of the judicial review of Law Number 19 the Year 2003 regarding State-Owned Enterprises (BUMN) with the number of cases 14 / PUU-XVI / 2018, Petitioners Putut Prabantoro and Lieutenant General (Ret) Kiki Syahnakri.

There are two articles of the SOE Law under review, namely Article 2 Paragraph 1 (a) and (b) which contains the intent and purpose of establishment of BUMN and Article 4 Paragraph 4 concerning the change of state financial participation. The Petitioner considered that the two articles are not in accordance with the spirit of economic development.

Koerniatmanto rated that, the sound provisions of Article 2 paragraph 1 (a) and (b) of the SOE Act contain very biased meaning. This is evidenced by the exclusion of the word ‘prosperity of the people’ as mentioned in Article 33 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, which is the main basis of the establishment of the Law on SOEs.

“This is clearly not in line with the paradigm, that the state-owned enterprises in managing state finance are a demo or a way of promoting the intellectual life of the Indonesian nation and the whole Indonesian motherland, and to promote public welfare, and not for the benefit of the capital owner,” he said.

Quoting the Court’s decision number 48 / PUU-XI / 2013, Koerniatmanto said, the purpose and objective of establishing SOEs is to contribute to the development of the national economy and state revenues, as well as the pursuit of profit.

“Pursuit of profit is a phrase that is still in a coma and not a point. The pursuit of profit needs to be emphasized, that this is for the sake of educating the life of the nation, “said Koerniatmanto.

Meanwhile, in relation to the phrase ‘stipulated by Government Regulation’ in Article 4 paragraph (4) of the SOE Law, Koerniatmanto said it has caused misuse of the meaning of Article 23C of the 1945 Constitution.

“Article 23C of the Constitution mandates the change of capital participation in SOEs regulated by law has been degraded into equity participation stipulated by Government Regulations,” said Korniatmanto.

Meanwhile, Mulawarwan University’s Academician Bernaulus Saragih said that the government’s investment in State-Owned Enterprises (BUMN) must be through good control mechanisms. Thus, SOEs can be more responsible.

“That the government’s capital participation of SOEs from public funds or APBN must be through mechanisms that can be controlled by the people and their representation. So SOEs can be more responsible for the utilization of natural wealth of Indonesia more just, and responsible for preserving natural resources in support of sustainable development in Indonesia, “said Bernaulus.

Previously, in his petition, the applicant mentioned that the existence of the articles was distorted normatively and led to the issuance of derivative regulations, namely Government Regulation No. 47 of 2017 concerning the Addition of State Equity Participation of the Republic of Indonesia in State Owned Company’s Share Capital.

In PP (also known as PP Holding of SOE Tambang) three SOEs are transferred to PT Indonesia Asahan Aluminum Persero (Inalum). These three SOEs, include PT Aneka Tambang Tbk (Persero) Limited Company, Limited Liability Company (PT Timah Tbk), and Limited Liability Company (PT) PT Bukit Asam Tbk.

The Petitioners also considered that Article 4 paragraph (4) of the SOE Law indicates the effect of state equity participation in other SOEs, so that SOEs become a subsidiary of other SOEs.

This provision has eliminated the SOEs and can be categorized as the privatization of the new model due to the transformation of the form of SOEs into subsidiaries of SOEs without going through the mechanism of the state budget and the approval of the House of Representatives.

Reporter: Putu Merta Surya Putra

Source: Liputan6.com [idr]