Oleh: M. Gilang Nugroho, S.H.

Note: English language version is available below

Menuju Indonesia Sebagai Penentu Harga Komoditas Strategis

Pelaksanaan ekspor satu pintu melalui PT Danantara Sumberdaya Indonesia sebagaimana direncanakan Pemerintah dapat dipandang sebagai bagian dari strategi yang lebih luas untuk memperkuat posisi Indonesia dalam perdagangan komoditas global.

Dalam konteks tersebut, kewenangan BUMN Ekspor untuk menentukan harga jual komoditas strategis memiliki keterkaitan yang menarik dengan rencana pembentukan Bursa Mineral dan Komoditas Strategis yang menjadi salah satu agenda dalam revisi Undang-Undang Pengembangan dan Penguatan Sektor Keuangan ("UU P2SK").

Apabila kedua kebijakan tersebut berjalan secara berkesinambungan, Indonesia tidak lagi hanya berperan sebagai pemasok bahan baku yang mengikuti harga pasar internasional (price taker), tetapi berpotensi berkembang menjadi negara yang memiliki pengaruh lebih besar dalam pembentukan harga (price influencer) bahkan dalam jangka panjang menjadi price maker bagi komoditas tertentu yang memiliki posisi strategis di pasar global.

Selain aspek harga, berbagai pemaparan Pemerintah juga menunjukkan bahwa PT Danantara Sumberdaya Indonesia diproyeksikan memiliki fungsi strategis dalam pengelolaan volume ekspor. Dalam skema tersebut, ekspor dapat ditingkatkan ketika harga global sedang menguntungkan, sementara pada saat harga internasional mengalami penurunan, sebagian komoditas dapat dialihkan untuk memenuhi kebutuhan domestik, termasuk kebutuhan energi, pembangkit listrik, maupun industri dalam negeri.

Pengecualian Dari Kewajiban Ekspor Melalui PT Danantara Sumberdaya Indonesia

Di tengah pendekatan sentralisasi tersebut, PP 24 Tahun 2026 tetap membuka ruang pengecualian bagi pelaku usaha tertentu.

Pasal 4 ayat (2) mengatur bahwa pelaku usaha dapat dikecualikan dari kewajiban ekspor melalui BUMN Ekspor apabila memiliki kontrak atau perjanjian dengan Pemerintah Indonesia yang sekurang-kurangnya memuat ketentuan mengenai investasi, divestasi, serta pengolahan dan/atau pemurnian di dalam negeri, dan telah memperoleh persetujuan melalui rapat koordinasi antar kementerian dan lembaga terkait.

Meskipun demikian, ketentuan tersebut masih menyisakan sejumlah pertanyaan hukum yang memerlukan penjelasan lebih lanjut.

Pertama, belum terdapat kejelasan apakah persyaratan investasi, divestasi, dan pengolahan/pemurnian tersebut harus dipenuhi secara kumulatif atau dapat dipenuhi secara alternatif. Penggunaan kata "dan" dalam norma tersebut cenderung mengarah pada pemenuhan secara kumulatif, namun redaksi "memuat ketentuan paling sedikit" masih membuka ruang interpretasi yang berbeda.

Kedua, PP 24 Tahun 2026 menggunakan istilah "kontrak atau perjanjian dengan Pemerintah" tanpa memberikan penjelasan mengenai bentuk instrumen hukumnya. Sampai saat ini belum diketahui apakah Pemerintah akan menyediakan bentuk perjanjian baku, sejauh mana ruang negosiasi tersedia bagi pelaku usaha, serta bagaimana mekanisme perubahan maupun penyesuaian klausul kontrak di kemudian hari.

Ketiga, istilah "investasi" dan "divestasi" yang digunakan dalam ketentuan tersebut juga belum memiliki parameter yang jelas. Belum terdapat penjelasan apakah investasi dimaksud harus berbentuk penanaman modal langsung, investasi melalui pasar modal, maupun bentuk investasi strategis lainnya. Demikian pula dengan divestasi, belum terdapat kejelasan mengenai kepada siapa divestasi harus dilakukan, berapa persentasenya, serta indikator yang digunakan untuk menentukan kapan kewajiban divestasi dianggap telah terpenuhi.

Siapa Yang Dimaksud Dengan "Pelaku Usaha"?

Pertanyaan menarik lainnya adalah tidak adanya definisi yang lebih rinci mengenai pihak yang dimaksud sebagai "pelaku usaha".

Dalam praktik bisnis internasional modern, struktur kepemilikan perusahaan sumber daya alam sering kali melibatkan beberapa lapis perusahaan di berbagai yurisdiksi. Oleh karena itu, muncul pertanyaan apakah pihak yang dimaksud adalah perusahaan pengekspor di Indonesia, perusahaan induk, afiliasi di luar negeri, atau bahkan pemilik manfaat sebenarnya (ultimate beneficial owner). Apakah ini artinya Pemerintah Indonesia bertujuan untuk menjalin kesepakatan langsung dengan "Bos Besar" daripada harus melalui entitas pihak ketiga?

Pertanyaan ini menjadi semakin relevan mengingat Pemerintah Indonesia saat ini sedang memperkuat rezim transparansi kepemilikan manfaat korporasi melalui berbagai kebijakan terkait verifikasi dan pengawasan pemilik manfaat (beneficial ownership) terutama sejak terbitnya Peraturan Menteri Hukum Republik Indonesia Nomor 2 Tahun 2025 Tentang Verifikasi Dan Pengawasan Pemilik Manfaat Korporasi.

Risiko Sengketa dan Kepastian Berusaha

Karena pengecualian diberikan melalui suatu kontrak atau perjanjian, maka aspek penyelesaian sengketa juga menjadi isu yang penting untuk diperhatikan.

Belum terdapat penjelasan mengenai forum penyelesaian sengketa yang akan digunakan apabila terjadi perselisihan antara Pemerintah dan pelaku usaha terkait pelaksanaan kontrak tersebut. Pertanyaan mengenai pilihan hukum, arbitrase, pengadilan, dampak terhadap kegiatan usaha lainnya, serta kemungkinan terjadinya cross default masih memerlukan kejelasan lebih lanjut untuk memberikan kepastian hukum bagi para investor dan pelaku usaha.

Evaluasi Kontrak Eksisting

PP 24 Tahun 2026 juga mengatur bahwa kontrak penjualan yang telah ditandatangani sebelum tanggal 1 Juni 2026 dan masih berlaku akan dievaluasi oleh BUMN Ekspor.

Dalam pelaksanaannya, ketentuan ini berpotensi menimbulkan sejumlah tantangan praktis. Banyak kontrak perdagangan internasional memuat klausul kerahasiaan yang membatasi pengungkapan isi kontrak kepada pihak ketiga. Oleh karena itu, pelaku usaha kemungkinan perlu memperoleh persetujuan atau waiver dari pembeli luar negeri sebelum menyerahkan dokumen kepada BUMN Ekspor.

Selain itu, tidak semua transaksi ekspor dilakukan berdasarkan kontrak formal yang komprehensif. Dalam praktik perdagangan internasional tertentu, transaksi dapat dilakukan melalui korespondensi email, purchase order, atau dokumen perdagangan lainnya tanpa adanya kontrak jual beli yang terpisah dan terstruktur.

Mekanisme Pembayaran Menjadi Faktor Penentu

Pada akhirnya, keberhasilan implementasi kebijakan ekspor satu pintu kemungkinan akan sangat ditentukan oleh mekanisme pembayaran yang diterapkan.

Pertanyaan mendasar yang masih perlu dijawab adalah apakah PT Danantara Sumberdaya Indonesia akan berperan sebagai perantara ekspor atau sebagai pembeli tunggal (single buyer) yang membeli seluruh komoditas dari para pemasok domestik sebelum menjualnya ke pasar internasional.

Apabila mekanisme pembayaran dapat memberikan kepastian, menjamin arus kas pelaku usaha, serta memastikan manfaat ekonomi dari perdagangan internasional tetap dinikmati oleh para produsen nasional, maka keberadaan PT Danantara Sumberdaya Indonesia berpotensi menjadi instrumen yang memperkuat daya saing ekspor Indonesia.

Sebaliknya, apabila aspek pembiayaan, likuiditas, dan jaminan pembayaran tidak diatur secara memadai, maka tantangan implementasi dapat muncul seiring dengan besarnya volume perdagangan yang harus dikelola.

---

English Version

Government Regulation No. 24 of 2026: Indonesia's First Step Toward Consolidating Strategic Natural Resource Export Governance

The Government of Indonesia has issued Government Regulation No. 24 of 2026 concerning the Governance of Strategic Natural Resource Commodity Exports, introducing a new framework for the management of Indonesia's strategic commodity exports.

One of the most significant provisions is the appointment of a State-Owned Enterprise ("Export SOE") as the sole authorized entity to conduct exports of designated strategic commodities, either as owner or exclusive intermediary. In addition, the Export SOE is granted authority to determine export selling prices for such commodities.

At the initial stage, the regulation applies only to coal, palm oil, and ferro alloys. However, the phrase "implemented in stages" clearly indicates that additional commodities may be brought within the scope of the regime in the future.

From a policy perspective, the regulation reflects the Government's broader effort to strengthen control over the entire natural resource value chain, including production, downstream processing, trade, and exports.

Toward Indonesia Becoming a Strategic Commodity Price Maker

The proposed single-gate export model through PT Danantara Sumberdaya Indonesia may be viewed as part of a broader national strategy aimed at strengthening Indonesia's position in global commodity markets.

In this context, the authority granted to the Export SOE to determine export prices appears closely connected with the proposed establishment of a Mineral and Strategic Commodity Exchange under the ongoing reform of Indonesia's financial sector framework.

If implemented cohesively, these initiatives could gradually transform Indonesia from a commodity price taker into a price influencer, and potentially a price maker for selected strategic commodities.

Beyond pricing, various government presentations suggest that PT Danantara Sumberdaya Indonesia may also play a role in managing export volumes. Under such a model, exports could be increased during periods of favorable international prices, while domestic allocation may be prioritized when global market conditions weaken.

Exemptions From The Export SOE Requirement

Despite the centralized framework, the regulation provides an exemption mechanism for certain business actors.

Under Article 4 paragraph (2), exporters may be exempted from the obligation to export through the Export SOE if they have entered into an agreement with the Government of Indonesia containing provisions relating to investment, divestment, and domestic processing and/or refining activities, subject to approval through an inter-ministerial coordination process.

However, several important legal questions remain unresolved, including whether such requirements must be fulfilled cumulatively or alternatively, the legal nature of the contemplated agreements, and the extent of negotiation rights available to business actors.

Who Qualifies As A "Business Actor"?

The regulation does not provide a detailed definition of the term "business actor."

As modern natural resource investments frequently involve complex multinational ownership structures, uncertainty remains as to whether the relevant contracting party must be the exporting entity, a parent company, an offshore affiliate, or even the ultimate beneficial owner of the corporate group. Does this mean that the Government of Indonesia aim to struck the deal directly with the "big boss" rather through third parties firm?

This question becomes increasingly relevant given that the Government of Indonesia is currently strengthening the beneficial ownership transparency regime through various policies concerning the verification and supervision of beneficial owners, particularly following the issuance of Minister of Law Regulation No. 2 of 2025 on the Verification and Supervision of Beneficial Owners of Corporations.

Dispute Resolution And Investment Certainty

Since exemptions are granted through contractual arrangements, dispute resolution mechanisms become particularly important.

Questions relating to governing law, arbitration, litigation, cross-default implications, and the treatment of ongoing operations during disputes remain unanswered and will likely be critical considerations for investors.

Review Of Existing Contracts

The regulation further requires existing sales contracts signed prior to 1 June 2026 and still in force to be reviewed by the Export SOE.

This requirement may create practical challenges, particularly where contracts contain confidentiality obligations or where transactions are documented through commercial correspondence through email or simple purchase order rather than comprehensive written agreements.

Payment Mechanism As The Ultimate Test

Ultimately, the success of the single-gate export model may depend on one fundamental issue: payment certainty.

Whether PT Danantara Sumberdaya Indonesia acts merely as an export intermediary or as a single buyer purchasing commodities from domestic suppliers before reselling them internationally will significantly affect market acceptance.

If payment certainty, liquidity support, and fair economic returns can be ensured, the model may serve as an effective safety net for domestic suppliers. Conversely, without sufficient financial capacity and risk management mechanisms, implementation challenges may emerge as transaction volumes increase.

International NGOs (INGOs) operating in Indonesia face newly enforced tax obligations. These requirements, covering annual audits, fiscal clearance certificates, and coordinated enforcement by supervisory ministries, mark a new era of compliance.

Introduction

Indonesia has sharpened its regulatory and tax compliance framework for International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs). The Directorate General of Taxes (DJP), working in tandem with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other supervisory ministries (K/L pengampu), now places tax accountability at the heart of licensing and oversight.

In this alert, we highlight five critical obligations outlined in information we obtained on 25 September 2025, which INGOs must urgently integrate into their compliance systems. From our view, these obligations are not optional as failure to comply risks suspension, denial of license renewal, or even termination of operations in Indonesia.

This article complements the broader due diligence framework discussed in MSS Counsel’s “International NGOs in Indonesia: Legal and Tax Compliance Due Diligence”, underscoring the urgent need for INGOs to adopt a proactive compliance roadmap. The discussion is accessible in:

https://msscounsel.com/2025/07/18/international-ngos-in-indonesia-legal-and-tax-compliance-due-diligence-in-accordance-with-the-national-regulatory-framework/.

---

1. Annual Audited Financial Statements by a Registered Indonesian Public Accountant

Every INGO must prepare and submit annual financial statements audited by an independent public accountant registered in Indonesia.

• 
  Why it matters: Audited statements provide assurance to both regulators and donors that the INGO’s use of funds is transparent, accurate, and aligned with ISAK 35 (the Indonesian accounting standard for nonprofit entities).
  
• 
  Risk of non-compliance: Submitting unaudited or foreign-only audits will no longer suffice. DJP and supervisory ministries require Indonesian-registered auditors to sign off. Failure to comply may cast doubt on financial integrity and trigger regulatory red flags.
  
• 
  Recommended action: INGOs should establish an annual audit calendar, appoint an accredited local audit firm, and prepare documentation well in advance.
  

---

2. Fiscal Clearance (SKF) Required at Termination or Renewal of Memorandum of Understanding (MSP)

At the conclusion or renewal of the Operational License through the MSP, foreign NGOs must settle all tax obligations and furnish a Surat Keterangan Fiskal (SKF) issued by DJP.

• 
  Why it matters: The SKF is now a gatekeeper document. Without it, renewal of MSP is impossible, and program operations may legally cease.
  
• 
  Risk of non-compliance: An INGO that cannot produce SKF at renewal will face operational paralysis, loss of donor trust, and reputational risk.
  
• 
  Recommended action: Establish quarterly tax reviews to ensure withholding (PPh 21, PPh 23, PPh 26, PPh Final) and annual filings are up to date, avoiding last-minute disputes with DJP.
  

---

3. Sanctions for Non-Fulfillment of Tax or Financial Obligations

If an INGO fails to meet tax or financial obligations, the supervisory ministry (K/L pengampu) is empowered to:

• 
  Issue a written warning;
  
• 
  Suspend program operations temporarily; or
  
• 
  Deny extension of MSP altogether.
  
• 
  Why it matters: The sanction authority rests not only with DJP but also with supervisory ministries. This dual enforcement structure significantly increases the risk profile for non-compliance.
  
• 
  Risk of non-compliance: Suspension halts program implementation, affecting beneficiaries and undermining donor contracts. Denial of MSP extension could permanently end operations in Indonesia.
  
• 
  Recommended action: Maintain active communication with the K/L pengampu, report compliance regularly, and resolve any tax or reporting gaps before they escalate to sanctionable events.
  

---

4. Coordination with DJP on Monitoring Tax Compliance

Supervisory ministries (K/L pengampu) are required to coordinate directly with DJP to monitor INGO tax compliance, including assisting with verification of data, documents, and financial information.

• 
  Why it matters: INGOs are no longer accountable to one ministry alone. Instead, their tax compliance is subject to multi-agency scrutiny, making lapses more visible and harder to conceal.
  
• 
  Risk of non-compliance: Inconsistent reporting between donor submissions, audited statements, and tax filings may be flagged during inter-agency coordination, triggering further review or audit.
  
• 
  Recommended action: Ensure consistency across all financial reports submitted to DJP, the K/L pengampu, and donors. Align internal systems so that the same financial truth is represented to all stakeholders.
  

---

5. Ensuring Reports Meet Standards of Accountability and Tax Compliance

Supervisory ministries must also ensure that INGOs’ activity and financial reports adhere to accountability and tax compliance standards, involving relevant units within the Ministry of Finance as necessary.

• 
  Why it matters: This standardization effort seeks to eliminate discrepancies and raise the reporting bar for all INGOs. Reports are not only programmatic but must also align with fiscal transparency requirements.
  
• 
  Risk of non-compliance: Submitting activity reports without adequate financial disclosure or failing to meet prescribed formats may delay approvals, risk funding disbursement, or trigger audit requests.
  
• 
  Recommended action: INGOs should align reporting formats with ISAK 35 and DJP’s requirements, and integrate both programmatic and financial metrics in submissions. Independent reviews before submission are strongly advised.
  

---

Conclusion

These five obligations — audited local financial statements, fiscal clearance (SKF), sanction authority, DJP coordination, and standardized accountability reporting — signal a new era of fiscal discipline for INGOs in Indonesia.

Compliance is no longer a matter of goodwill but a legal precondition for operational continuity. INGOs must urgently review their tax posture, reporting frameworks, and coordination mechanisms.

Our Approach

MSS, in partnership with Terala Consulting (a certified Accounting Services Office), provides specialized services to help INGOs meet these requirements. Our scope of work spans three critical phases:

1. Financial and Tax Compliance Review

• Objective: Ensure 2025 financial and tax records are accurate, reconciled, and compliant with Indonesian standards in preparation for audit and liquidation.
• Activities:
  • High-level review of bookkeeping entries and trial balances.
  • Review of monthly tax filings (PPh 21, 23, 4(2), VAT).
  • Analysis of accounting treatment of grants, restricted funds, assets, and expenses.
  • Recommendations for adjustments to achieve audit readiness.
  • Draft financial statements under the appropriate SAK standard.
• Deliverables: Compliance Review Report, recommended adjustments, draft financial statements, and audit readiness checklist.

2. Liquidation Financial Statements & Annual Corporate Tax Return

• Objective: Support INGOs in preparing liquidation-format financial statements and submitting the final Annual Corporate Tax Return (SPT Badan).
• Activities:
  • Prepare liquidation statements reflecting final asset write-offs, closing balances, and reconciliation of unused grants.
  • Apply updated accounting standards (SAK IKOP/EP per IAI 2023).
  • Validate final journal entries and reconcile balances.
  • Prepare and e-file the 2025 SPT Badan.
• Deliverables: Final liquidation financials, reconciliation workbook, management letter, and electronic filing proof.

3. NPWP Revocation Monitoring & Support for INGO that wish to Deregister/Exit from Indonesia

• Objective: Ensure the INGO’s NPWP is formally revoked by DJP, completing tax deregistration.
• Activities:
  • Prepare and verify a comprehensive NPWP revocation package (final SPTs, e-Bupot, e-Faktur, reconciled closing balance sheet).
  • Draft and submit the official NPWP revocation request to DJP.
  • Act as liaison with DJP, responding to inquiries, preparing additional documents, and attending meetings if required.
  • Provide monthly progress reports until the revocation letter is issued (typically 6–12 months).
• Deliverables: NPWP revocation checklist, submission package, monthly status updates, and final revocation confirmation.

---

Why This Matters for INGOs

The new DJP requirements — audited financial statements, SKF at license renewal, coordination with supervisory ministries, and strict sanction mechanisms, mean that INGOs must be audit-ready before the annual review and certainly before any extension of the MSP or deregistration of its MSP.

By working with MSS and Terala, INGOs gain:

• 
  Strategic legal advisory (MSS Counsel).
  
• 
  Certified accounting and tax services (Terala Consulting).
  
• 
  A compliance roadmap that covers both operational obligations and exit planning.
  

This dual legal–accounting support is particularly valuable where INGOs plan deregistration and NPWP revocation, ensuring they leave Indonesia without unresolved tax liabilities or regulatory exposure.

For further consultation, you can reach out to:
MSS & Associates – Business Law Consultants
Indonesia Stock Exchange Tower 2, 17th Floor
Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav. 52-53, Jakarta 12170 – Indonesia
Phone: MSS +62 21 5291 7402, Terala +62 818 906 134
office@msscounsel.com
gilang@msscounsel.com | Tienmulyanthi@teralaconsulting.com
www.msscounsel.com | www.teralaconsulting.com

Sejak UU Minerba
Nomor 4 Tahun 2009 dan revisinya dalam UU Nomor 3 Tahun 2020, Indonesia menetapkan prinsip bahwa
kedaulatan atas sumber daya alam harus diwujudkan melalui kepemilikan saham,
tidak hanya sekadar pengelolaan tambang. Salah satu instrumen utama adalah
kewajiban divestasi saham perusahaan tambang asing kepada pihak Indonesia,
termasuk Pemerintah Daerah (Pemda).

Divestasi bukan
sekadar urusan korporasi atau investasi; ini adalah jalan strategis untuk
memastikan manfaat ekonomi terdistribusi ke daerah penghasil tambang.

Indonesia
sebagai Pusat Sumber Daya Strategis Dunia

Sebagai negara
dengan cadangan mineral strategis terbesar di dunia, Indonesia kini
menjadi salah satu pusat perhatian global. Negara ini memiliki potensi luar biasa dalam hal:

• Rare earth dan logam tanah jarang,
• Tembaga berkualitas tinggi,
• Nikel laterit terbaik untuk baterai kendaraan listrik (EV),
• Dan mineral penting lainnya seperti emas,
  bijih besi, mangan, dan timah hitam.

Beberapa
kabupaten/kota yang saat ini dikenal sebagai pusat tambang strategis
nasional, antara lain:

1. Mimika
2. Mandailing Natal
3. Banyuwangi
4. Sumbawa Barat
5. Halmahera Utara
6. Minahasa Utara
7. Minahasa Selatan
8. Bolaang Mongondow Raya
9. Kepulauan Sangihe
10. Parigi Moutong
11. Kota Palu
12. Toli Toli
13. Donggala
14. Seluma (Bengkulu)
15. Kolaka
16. Morowali
17. Halmahera Timur
18. Luwu Timur

Dan masih banyak lagi
daerah penghasil mineral strategis lainnya di seluruh Indonesia.

Jalan Terjal
Divestasi: Tantangan dan Peluang

Sampai hari ini,
proses divestasi saham untuk Pemda masih belum menjadi jalur yang mudah.
Tantangan utama yang dihadapi
meliputi:

• Minimnya kapasitas teknis dan pemahaman hukum di tingkat daerah,
• Masuknya kepentingan-kepentingan eksternal yang tidak selalu berbasis pada prinsip hukum,
• Terbatasnya fiskal dan infrastruktur kelembagaan daerah,
• Tidak adanya forum komunikasi dan koordinasi yang sistematis antar pemerintah daerah penghasil tambang.

Namun demikian,
kondisi belum adanya regulasi teknis yang terlalu membatasi justru
menjadi peluang besar. Saat ini, belum banyak aturan yang membatasi kreativitas
bisnis dan struktur kelembagaan. Hal ini memberikan ruang yang fleksibel bagi
pemerintah daerah untuk merancang strategi dan struktur hukum yang inovatif,
asalkan tetap dalam koridor konstitusional dan akuntabel secara publik.

Tiga Kasus
Divestasi Pemda: Belum Berbuah Manfaat Definitif

1. Kabupaten Mimika – Freeport Indonesia
   Meskipun dialokasikan 10% saham melalui IPMM setelah pengambilalihan oleh MIND ID, kepemilikan ini berbentuk pasif, tidak disertai akses riil terhadap manajemen atau arus dividen.
2. Kabupaten Sumbawa Barat – Newmont / AMNT
   Melalui perusahaan daerah DMB, Pemda hanya memperoleh efek ekonomi minor (±6% saham efektif), sedangkan skema keuangan yang kompleks mengurangi manfaat langsung yang bisa dinikmati daerah.
3. Kabupaten Kutai Timur – KPC
   Klaim atas 18,6% saham pada 2012 terkendala dana untuk menyelesaikan transaksi dan perolehan tetap hingga kini tidak terwujud secara resmi.

Tekanan Fiskal
Pemda: “Tidak Bisa Hanya Andalkan Dana Transfer”

Tekanan fiskal semakin
nyata. Menurut Antara News, pada Februari 2025 terdapat pemangkasan Rp50,6
triliun dana transfer ke daerah (TKD) oleh pemerintah pusat DJPB
Kemenkeu+6ANTARA News Jawa Timur+6merdeka.com+6. Ditambah lagi, Menteri Keuangan Sri Mulyani
mengusulkan agar daerah ikut menanggung biaya pensiun ASN, dengan beban dana
pensiun yang hampir mencapai Rp967 triliun InfoSumsel.id
- iNOVASI untuk SUMSEL.
Kemudian, beberapa daerah bahkan belum mampu membayar gaji 13 hingga pensiun
ASN karena keterlambatan transfer dan kapasitas fiskal terbatas .

Kondisi ini memaksa
Pemda untuk mulai berpikir jauh ke depan untuk meningkatkan “Kemandirian”
dengan cara menaikkan pendapatan daerah melalui berbagai opsi strategis, salah
satunya adalah divestasi saham perusahaan tambang mineral. 

Kurangnya Keberadaan
Konsultan Multidisiplin & Kebutuhan Forum Sinergi

Pada praktiknya, Pemda
menemukan keterbatasan akses terhadap konsultan yang memahami aspek hukum,
teknis, dan bisnis secara bersamaan. Hal itu menyulitkan mereka dalam menyusun
pembiayaan, tata kelola perusahaan daerah, dan negosiasi dengan pihak perusahaan
tambang mineral.

Oleh karena itu,
keberadaan forum koordinasi antar Pemda, seperti wacana pembentukan Asosiasi
Kabupaten Penghasil Tambang Mineral Indonesia (AKPTMI), menjadi sangat penting.
Asosiasi ini bisa menjadi:

• Tempat berbagi pengalaman dan strategi best-practice,
• Basis advokasi lintas lembaga untuk regulasi yang lebih mendukung,
• Mekanisme pendampingan bersama, terutama dalam hal struktur pembiayaan dan kelembagaan BUMD.

Kesimpulan

Diperlukan suatu tim konsultan yang mempunyai pengalaman multidisiplin yang mempunyai sejarah pengalaman multidisipliner di bidang hukum, teknis dan bisnis di bidang pertambangan mineral yang panjang  yang dapat secara bahu membahu membantu dan bekerja sama dengan Pemda untuk mendorong terlaksananya realisasi dari suatu  divestasi saham dari Perusahaan Tambang Mineral sesuai dengan aturan Perundangan yang berlaku, yang kita lihat sebagai suatu jalur langkah yang panjang dan penuh tantangan.

Tim kami memiliki
catatan pengalaman yang  cukup lama dan telah
menjumpai banyak tantangan dalam menempuh jalan panjang serta  berliku di bidang pertambangan mineral yang meliputi
aspek hukum, teknis, dan bisnis.

Divestasi saham
tambang adalah instrumen penting untuk memperkuat kemandirian fiskal daerah, tetapi
masih penuh hambatan struktural. Sampai ini, belum ada satu divestasi yang
memberikan manfaat optimal bagi Pemda. Kunci keberhasilan terletak pada:

1. Kesiapan dana dan struktur bisnis,
2. Konsultasi multidisiplin (hukum, teknis, keuangan),
3. Kolaborasi antar pemda melalui asosiasi resmi.

Kami sebagai
pengamat dan praktisi pertambangan menghimbau sekaligus, memberikan rekomendasi
agar penguatan kapasitas daerah dan kerja sama institusional menjadi perhatian
utama sebelum divestasi benar-benar bisa menjadi alat kedaulatan ekonomi daerah
yang efektif guna meningkatkan kemandirian dan mengurangi tekanan fiskal yang
akan menghambat pembangunan dan agenda-agenda strategis di daerah.

Apabila ada ketertarikan lebih lanjut dari anda setelah membaca tulisan ini, dapat membuka website kami: www.msscounsel.com, serta menghubungi kami untuk dapat berkomunikasi lebih intens dan berkelanjutan.

Indonesia Stock Exchange Tower 2, 17th Floor, Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav. 52-53, Jakarta 12170

+62 21 5291 7402

office@msscounsel.com | gilang@msscounsel.com

MSS & Associates proudly serves as legal counsel on a retainer basis for one of Indonesia’s leading electric vehicle (EV) manufacturers, whose fleet powers major ride-hailing platforms nationwide. Our strategic involvement places us at the forefront of a transformative movement reshaping Indonesia’s transportation and energy sectors.

A Promising Sector: EV Manufacturing and Charging Infrastructure Indonesia’s EV industry is experiencing unprecedented growth, fueled by robust government support, rising demand for energy efficiency, and a national commitment to sustainability. Two pivotal segments are driving this momentum:

EV Manufacturing: Indonesia has solidified its position as a regional hub for electric two-wheelers and commercial fleets. The country’s abundant nickel reserves, crucial for battery production, coupled with a large domestic market and cost-competitive manufacturing, have attracted significant investment. Strategic partnerships between local manufacturers, global technology providers, and ride-hailing platforms are fostering innovation and scaling production capacity.

EV Charging Infrastructure: The rapid expansion of EV fleets has spurred investment in charging infrastructure. Public and private charging stations (SPKLU and SPBKLU) are being deployed in urban centers, industrial zones, and along key transport corridors. These networks are critical to ensuring reliable, scalable, and accessible mobility solutions, aligning with Indonesia’s vision for a sustainable transport ecosystem.
These sectors are not only commercially lucrative but also integral to Indonesia’s long-term energy security and environmental goals, including its net-zero emissions target by 2060.

The Regulatory Landscape: Opportunities Amid Complexity
Indonesia has introduced several regulatory frameworks to accelerate the EV transition, including:

• Presidential Regulation No. 55 of 2019 on the Acceleration of the Battery Electric Vehicle Program, which outlines incentives for EV adoption and local manufacturing.
• Ministry of Industry Regulation No. 27 of 2021 (revised from earlier regulations, correcting the outdated reference to No. 27/M-IND/PER/5/2006, which is not relevant to EVs). This regulation provides incentives for domestic EV and battery production, including tax holidays and import duty exemptions.
• Ministerial Regulation of Energy and Mineral Resources (ESDM) No. 13 of 2020, which governs the development and operation of EV charging infrastructure (SPKLU and SPBKLU), including technical standards and pricing mechanisms.
• Investment Incentives: Frameworks from the Financial Services Authority (OJK) and the Investment Coordinating Board (BKPM) offer tax benefits, streamlined licensing, and foreign investment facilitation for EV-related businesses.

Despite this progress, several regulatory challenges persist:

• Fragmented Authority: Overlapping jurisdictions among ministries (e.g., Industry, Energy, Transportation) and local governments create coordination hurdles.
• Licensing Ambiguities: Private EV charging operators face unclear pathways for permits and operational approvals.
• Technical Standards: The absence of unified standards for EV components, batteries, and charging infrastructure hinders interoperability.
• Revenue-Sharing Models: Lack of clear guidelines for partnerships between ride-hailing platforms, manufacturers, and charging providers creates uncertainty.

These regulatory gaps, while challenging, present unique opportunities. The absence of overly restrictive rules allows businesses to innovate, develop new business models, and establish market leadership before regulations solidify.

Additional Material: Recent developments, such as the Presidential Regulation No. 79 of 2023, further strengthen the EV ecosystem by introducing carbon credit mechanisms and additional incentives for renewable energy integration in charging infrastructure. Additionally, the Ministry of Transportation Regulation No. PM 65 of 2020 governs safety and operational standards for EV fleets, particularly for commercial applications like ride-hailing. These updates signal Indonesia’s commitment to aligning its EV policies with global sustainability trends.

Legal Strategy as a Business Catalyst
In this dynamic regulatory environment, proactive legal counsel is essential to unlocking opportunities and mitigating risks. At MSS & Associates, we empower EV businesses with comprehensive legal solutions, including:

• Contract Design and Risk Allocation: Crafting robust agreements that address risks across the EV value chain, from battery supply to end-user services.
• Multi-Party Agreements: Structuring partnerships between manufacturers, ride-hailing platforms, driver networks, and charging station operators to ensure alignment and compliance.
• Innovative Business Models: Leveraging regulatory flexibility to design scalable models, such as subscription-based EV leasing or integrated fleet management systems.
• Regulatory Compliance and Advocacy: Advising on current regulations and anticipated changes, while engaging with stakeholders to shape favorable policies.

Case Study Addition
One of our flagship engagements involved advising a leading EV manufacturer on a vertically integrated partnership with a major ride-hailing platform. By structuring agreements that linked manufacturers, drivers, and charging operators, we facilitated a seamless ecosystem that reduced operational costs by 15%, enhanced driver accessibility to EVs, and ensured compliance with ESDM and BKPM regulations. This model has since been scaled to multiple cities, demonstrating the power of strategic legal frameworks.

Moving Forward
Indonesia’s EV ecosystem is a dynamic frontier, blending market potential with evolving regulations and strong policy support. With the government targeting 2.5 million EV users by 2030 and a robust battery supply chain anchored by Indonesia’s nickel reserves, the sector is poised for exponential growth.
The right legal strategy can accelerate market entry, reduce risks, and position businesses to capture value in this fast-evolving landscape. MSS & Associates is committed to providing the legal foundation for success in Indonesia’s EV industry.
For EV startups, investors, and infrastructure providers seeking clarity and strategic positioning, contact us today:

MSS & Associates – Business Law Consultants
Indonesia Stock Exchange Tower 2, 17th Floor
Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav. 52-53, Jakarta 12170 – Indonesia
Phone: MSS +62 21 5291 7402

office@msscounsel.com | gilang@msscounsel.com

www.msscounsel.com

Indonesia formally became a member of BRICS on 6 January 2025, followed shortly by the signing of the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) with the European Union on 13 July 2025. These landmark developments signal Indonesia’s bold stride onto the global stage. No longer content to be seen solely as a regional leader within ASEAN, Indonesia is now positioning itself as a bridge between the Global South and developed economies, aligning its regulatory, financial, and governance frameworks with international standards.

Indonesia’s rising stature is further validated by recent trade policy decisions, including the President of the United States lowering tariffs on Indonesian goods to 19%, a move that reflects increasing recognition of Indonesia’s economic potential and strategic importance in global supply chains.

This strategic transformation has not occurred in isolation. International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs) have played a vital role in shaping Indonesia’s developmental progress. Their work spans critical sectors such as education, healthcare, civil society, humanitarian response, and capacity building. Often, these organizations introduce globally tested programs that deliver measurable and sustainable outcomes in Indonesian communities.

The Complexity of INGO Operations in Indonesia

M. Gilang Nugroho, S.H., Managing Partner of MSS & Associates, brings over 14 years of
experience in advising INGOs in Indonesia. His firm currently serves as legal
counsel to 3 (three) prominent organizations, including an UK-based
international NGO operating globally in more than 200 territories, an
international NGO that operates based on federation of more than 70 members of
countries, and a Netherlands-based global development NGO renowned for its
international reach and sustainable programs in more than 25 countries.

Mrs. Tien
Mulyanthi, AMd., SE., MSc., BKP., Senior Tax and Financial Compliance Advisor at Terala Consulting,
contributes over 25 years of experience in managing the tax and financial
operations of more than 40 NGOs and INGOs operating across Indonesia, including
several major institutions based in the United States. Her advisory work spans
tax structuring, withholding obligations, audit readiness, and compliance with
both national tax regulations and international donor expectations. Her
insights have consistently helped nonprofit entities maintain financial
accountability while navigating Indonesia’s complex fiscal environment.

Together, Mr. Nugroho
and Mrs. Mulyanthi emphasize that INGOs in Indonesia operate under a distinct
legal framework, which is often more complex than that applied to conventional
private companies. These organizations must comply with multiple layers of
oversight, including:

• Licensing and operational permits,
• Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) with relevant ministries,
• Tax registration and reporting obligations,
• Employment and labor law compliance,
• Documentation and governance of program activities,
• Adherence to Indonesian laws concerning foreign entities and funding mechanisms.

Because INGOs
frequently represent the values and diplomatic interests of their home
countries, any regulatory non-compliance poses not only administrative
challenges but also reputational and geopolitical risks.

Today, reputational
risk is notably heightened. It is increasingly common to witness high-ranking
officials, including deputy ministers, record and publish online content
showcasing their direct interactions with private sector entities. These
actions, while often framed as transparency efforts, can provoke significant
public backlash, particularly when involving sensitive regulatory enforcement.
In parallel, the Indonesian National Police (POLRI) has expanded its role in
regulatory enforcement, including matters traditionally handled by civil
authorities. For example, POLRI now operates a public labor complaint hotline,
reflecting its active involvement even in employment-related legal issues.

Even minor missteps
may attract negative public or regulatory attention, potentially resulting in
sanctions, temporary suspensions, or the revocation of operating permits by the
supervising ministry.

Legal and Tax Due Diligence: A Strategic Necessity

To reduce these risks, MSS & Associates recommends that all INGOs conduct comprehensive legal and tax compliance due diligence on an annual basis. This is not merely a compliance checklist. It is a vital part of the organization’s risk management and governance framework.

As part of this process, INGOs are required to complete:

• Legal Questionnaire, containing over 100 targeted questions to assess regulatory compliance, internal governance, HR and contract structures, and licensing status;
• Tax Questionnaire developed jointly with Terala, MSS's strategic partner in tax audit and compliance, which includes more than 130 questions evaluating tax filings, withholding obligations, monthly and annual reports, and potential exposure points.

This due diligence allows INGOs to detect and address compliance vulnerabilities early, ensure audit readiness, and confidently continue their operations in Indonesia.

Personal Liability and Asset Freezing Risks for INGO
Leadership

In Indonesia, non-compliance is not merely an institutional risk. It carries personal consequences for senior leadership and board members.

• Personal Tax Liability

Under Articles 1 and 32 of the General Tax
Provisions and Procedures Law (UU KUP), individuals such as the Country
Director or Financial Controller may be designated as “tax responsible parties”
for the INGO. If the organization fails to fulfill its tax obligations, these
individuals may be personally liable for any outstanding amounts, penalties, or
legal sanctions.

• Criminal Exposure for AML and CTF Violations

Pursuant to:

- Law No. 8/2010 on the Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering (AML),
and

- Law No. 9/2013 on the Prevention and Eradication of Terrorism Financing
(CTF),



both corporate entities and individuals in control positions can be prosecuted.
INGOs and their leadership may face criminal charges, asset forfeiture, and
reputational damage if found complicit in or negligent toward AML/CTF
regulations.

• Freezing of Personal Bank Accounts

In cases involving tax evasion or money
laundering, both institutional and individual bank accounts may be frozen under
Indonesian law. The Directorate General of Taxes, under Article 32A of UU KUP
and Minister of Finance Regulation No. 61/PMK.03/2023, is empowered to freeze
personal assets and accounts of individuals deemed liable. Similarly, PPATK
(Indonesia’s Financial Intelligence Unit) may recommend account freezing for
AML/CTF violations involving INGO funds.



This means that Country Directors, Board Members, or other senior staff may
lose access to their personal accounts or be subject to asset seizures if they
are shown to have been negligent or complicit in the organization’s
non-compliance.

MSS and Terala Commitment

We recognize the legal, operational, and socio-political nuances INGOs must navigate in Indonesia. Our mission is to empower these organizations to focus on their programs while we safeguard their compliance and institutional credibility through strategic legal and tax advisory.

Legal and tax compliance due diligence is not a luxury. It is a responsibility. It protects the organization, its beneficiaries, its teams, and its long-term ability to fulfill its mission in Indonesia.

To schedule a confidential consultation or request our Legal and Tax Due Diligence toolkit, please contact MSS or Terala:

MSS & Associates – Business Law Consultants
Indonesia Stock Exchange Tower 2, 17th Floor
Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav. 52-53, Jakarta 12170 – Indonesia
Phone: MSS +62 21 5291 7402, Terala +62 818 906 134
office@msscounsel.com
gilang@msscounsel.com | Tienmulyanthi@teralaconsulting.com
www.msscounsel.com | www.teralaconsulting.com

As part of its strategic risk management and regulatory compliance initiative, some prominent Indonesian P2P Lending Companies engaged MSS & Associates to undertake a comprehensive Compliance Due Diligence review. This review comes at a pivotal time, following the issuance of new OJK regulations that significantly impact the operational and governance standards of entities operating within the peer-to-peer lending ecosystem, especially aiming to mitigate the risk of misconduct that shall become ground of the regulator to impose sanction that can lead to losses up to billions IDR or worse, a revocation of license before reaching return on investment.

Regulatory Background

Since obtaining the operational license from the Financial Services Authority (OJK), the Indonesian P2P Lending Company has been subject to evolving regulatory standards. The regulatory framework mainly includes:

• POJK on Information Technology-Based Joint Funding Services (LPBBTI);

• POJK on Anti-Money Laundering (AML), Counter-Terrorism Financing (CTF), and Counter-Proliferation Financing;

• POJK on Consumer and Community Protection.

These frameworks are complemented by derivative regulations issued by other ministries and agencies, making regulatory compliance increasingly complex and vital.

Objective of the Compliance Due Diligence

The primary aim of the compliance due diligence is to:

• Assess the Indonesian P2P Lending Company's adherence to financial sector regulations, including AML and CTF obligations, consumer protection, and the most importantly the product and operational of the Company based on the regulation on LPBBTI from time to time since the Company start commercially operating;
• Identify any compliance gaps and assess related risks;
• Recommend actionable improvements to strengthen the company’s regulatory posture and prevent reputational or financial loss.

The Compliance Due Diligence also function as internal initiative that reflects the Client’s commitment to proactive governance and regulatory integrity which becomes one of key elements to further maintain investor trusts.

MSS Scope of Work

The due diligence will cover the following core areas:

• 
  General regulatory awareness and compliance training practices;
  
• 
  Compliance with Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing regulations;
  
• 
  Data privacy and protection obligations;
  
• 
  Industry best practices across internal operations and third-party engagements.
  

Standard Methodology

The review will be conducted using a structured and consultative methodology, including:

• 
  Document Review: Analysis of policies, procedures, compliance reports, and training materials;
  
• 
  Stakeholder Interviews: Dialogue with compliance officers, division heads, and relevant personnel;
  
• 
  On-Site Inspections: Direct assessment of operational practices and internal controls (if applicable).
  

MSS Deliverables

Upon conclusion of the due diligence, MSS will deliver:

1. 
   Comprehensive Report – Highlighting regulatory gaps, risk areas, and tailored recommendations;
   
2. 
   Executive Summary Presentation – For senior management, outlining key findings and strategic implications;
   
3. 
   Action Plan – A practical, phased roadmap categorizing recommendations into immediate, short-term, and long-term measures, with assigned responsibilities.
   

Project Timeline

The project is set to span around 3-5 months, with key milestones as follows:

Activity
Project kickoff, document collection, stakeholder interviews
Data analysis and on-site verification
Initial assessment report preparation
Report refinement and action plan development
Final presentation to management and stakeholders

Note: The timeline may adjust based on documentation availability and stakeholder responsiveness.

Roles & Responsibilities

• Client Project Lead: Client's compliance or legal staff (overall coordination)
• Legal & Compliance Team: Providing access to internal policies and key records
• All Divisions: Supporting information requests and internal alignment
• MSS: Legal due diligence, analysis, and reporting

Confidentiality Assurance

All information accessed in the course of this engagement will be handled with the strictest confidentiality and used solely for the purpose of this due diligence review.

For further inquiries about legal and compliance advisory services in the fintech sector, contact us at:

• Indonesia Stock Exchange Tower 2, 17th Floor, Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav. 52-53, Jakarta 12170
• +62 21 5291 7402
• office@msscounsel.com | gilang@msscounsel.com
• www.msscounsel.com

Oleh: Imam Hermanda, S.H.

Asas Monogami dalam UU Perkawinan

Sebelum membahas poligami dalam sistem hukum Republik Indonesia, maka perlu kita garis bawahi dahulu bahwa pada dasarnya
Undang-undang No. 1 Tahun 1974 tentang Perkawinan (“UU Perkawinan”)  menganut asas monogami. Dalam Pasal 1 UU Perkawinan, telah didefinisikan "perkawinan" sebagai ikatan lahir bathin antara seorang pria  dengan seorang wanita sebagai suami istri dengan tujuan membentuk keluarga (rumah tangga) yang bahagia dan kekal berdasarkan Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa. Jadi, hukum perkawinan Indonesia berasaskan monogami.

Selanjutnya asas itu ditegaskan kembali dalam Pasal 3 ayat (1) dan penjelasannya UU Perkawinan yang berbunyi pada asasnya dalam suatu perkawinan seorang pria hanya boleh mempunyai seorang istri dan seorang wanita hanya boleh mempunyai seorang suami (asas monogami). Namun, Pengadilan, dapat memberi izin kepada seorang suami untuk beristeri lebih dari seorang apabila dikehendaki oleh fihak-fihak yang bersangkutan (Pasal 3 ayat (2) UU Perkawinan).

Berdasarkan ketentuan Pasal Pasal 40 Peraturan Pemerintah No. 75 tahun 1975 tentang Pelaksanaan UU No. 1 tahun 1974 tentang Perkawinan (“PP Perkawinan”), apabila seorang suami bermaksud untuk beristeri lebih dari seorang maka ia wajib mengajukan permohonan secara tertulis kepada Pengadilan.

Poligami dalam Kompilasi Hukum Islam Republik Indonesia

Merujuk pada ketentuan Pasal 55 dan Pasal 56 Instruksi Presiden Nomor 1 Tahun 1991 tentang Penyebarluasan Kompilasi Hukum Islam (“KHI”), secara garis besar mengatur bahwa :

Pasal 55 KHI :

• Beristeri lebih satu orang pada waktu bersamaan, terbatas hanya sampai empat isteri;
• Syarat utaama beristeri lebih dari seorang, suami harus mampu berlaku adil terhadap isteri-isteri dan anak-anaknya;
•  Apabila syarat utama yang disebut pada ayat (2) tidak mungkin dipenuhi, suami dilarang beristeri dari seorang.

Pasal 56 KHI :

• Suami yang hendak beristeri lebih dari satu orang harus mendapat izin dari Pengadilan Agama.
• Pengajuan permohonan Izin dimaksud pada ayat (1) dilakukan menurut pada tata cara sebagaimana diatur dalam Bab.VIII Peraturan Pemeritah No.9 Tahun 1975.
• Perkawinan yang dilakukan dengan isteri kedua, ketiga atau keempat tanpa izin dari Pengadilan Agama, tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum.

Selanjutnya, secara spesifik KHI mengatur bahwa :

Pasal 57 KHI :

Pengadilan Agama hanya memberikan izin kepada seorang suami yang akan beristeri lebih dari seorang apabila :

1. isteri tidak dapat menjalankan kewajiban sebagai isteri;
2. isteri mendapat cacat badan atau penyakit yang tidak dapat disembuhkan;
3. tidak dapat melahirkan keturunan.

Pasal 58 KHI :

• Selain syarat utama yang disebut pada pasal 55 ayat (2) maka untuk memperoleh izin pengadilan Agama, harus pula dipenuhi syarat-syarat yang ditentukan pada Pasal 5 Undang-Undang No. 1 Tahun 1974 yaitu :
• adanya pesetujuan isteri;
• adanya kepastian bahwa suami mampu menjamin keperluan hidup isteri-isteri dan       anak-anak mereka.

• Dengan tidak mengurangi ketentuan pasal 41 huruf b Peraturan Pemerintah No. 9 Tahun 1975, persetujuan isteri atau isteri-isteri dapat diberikan secara tertulis atau denganlisan, tetapi sekalipun telah ada persetujuan tertulis, persetujuan ini dipertegas dengan persetujuan lisan isteri pada sidang Pengadilan Agama.

• Persetujuan dimaksud pada ayat (1) huruf a tidak diperlukan bagi seorang suami apabila isteri atau isteri-isterinya tidak mungkin dimintai persetujuannya dan tidak dapat menjadi pihak dalam perjanjian atau apabila tidak ada kabar dari isteri atau isteri-isterinya sekurang-kurangnya 2 tahun atau karena sebab lain yang perlu mendapat penilaian Hakim.

Pasal 59 KHI :

Dalam hal istri tidak mau memberikan persetujuan, dan permohonan izin untuk beristeri lebih dari satu orang berdasarkan atas salh satu alasan yang diatur dalam pasal 55 ayat (2) dan 57, Pengadilan Agama dapat menetapkan tenyang pemberian izin setelah memeriksa dan mendengar isteri yang bersangkutan di persidangan Pengadilan Agama, dan terhadap penetapan ini isteri atau suami dapat mengajukan banding atau kasasi.

Poligami Dalam UU Perkawinan

Berdasarkan ketentuan Pasal 4 dan 5 serta memperhatikan Pasal 9 UU Perkawinan, Pengadilan dapat memberi izin kepada seorang suami untuk beristri lebih dari seorang (poligami), dengan ketentuan :

Pasal 4 UU Perkawinan :

• Dalam hal seorang suami akan beristeri lebih dari seorang, sebagaimana tersebut dalam Pasal 3 ayat (2) Undang-undang ini, maka ia wajib mengajukan permohonan kepada Pengadilan di daerah tempat tinggalnya;

• Pengadilan dimaksud data ayat (1) pasal ini hanya memberikan izin kepada seorang suami yang akan beristeri lebih dari seorang apabila: a. isteri tidak dapat menjalankan kewajibannya sebagai isteri; b. isteri mendapat cacat badan atau penyakit yang tidak dapat disembuhkan;       c. isteri tidak dapat melahirkan keturunan.

Kemudian, berdasarkan ketentuan Pasal 5 ayat (1) dan (2) UU Perkawinan juga mengatur, bahwa :

• Untuk dapat mengajukan permohonan kepada Pengadilan, sebagaimana dimaksud dalam         Pasal 4 ayat (1) Undang-undang ini, harus dipenuhi syarat-syarat sebagai berikut :
• adanya persetujuan dari isteri/isteri-isteri;
• adanya kepastian bahwa suami mampu menjamin keperluan- keperluan hidup isteri-isteri dan anak-anak mereka;
• adanya jaminan bahwa suami akan berlaku adil terhadap isteri- isteri dan anak-anak mereka.
• Persetujuan yang dimaksud pada ayat (1) huruf a pasal ini tidak diperlukan  bagi seorang suami apabila isteri/isteri-isterinya tidak mungkin dimintai persetujuannya dan tidak dapat menjadi pihak dalam perjanjian, atau apabila tidak ada kabar dari isterinya selama sekurang-kurangnya 2 (dua) tahun, atau karena sebab-sebab lainnya yang perlu mendapat penilaian dari Hakim Pengadilan.

Pasal 9 UU Perkawinan :

Seorang yang masih terikat tali perkawinan dengan orang lain tidak dapat kawin lagi, kecuali dalam hal yang tersebut pada Pasal 3 ayat (2) dan Pasal 4 Undang-undang ini.

Persyaratan Permohonan Izin Poligami :

Berdasarkan ketentuan Pasal 40 PP Perkawinan mengatur bahwa, apabila seorang suami bermaksud untuk beristeri lebih dari seorang maka ia wajib mengajukan permohonan secara tertulis kepada Pengadilan.

Selanjutnya, Pasal 41 PP perkawinan menentukan bahwa :

Pengadilan kemudian memeriksa mengenai :

1. Ada atau tidaknya alasan yang memungkinkan seorang suami kawin lagi, ialah :bahwa isteri tidak dapat menjalankan kewajibannya sebagai isteri;bahwa isteri mendapat cacat badan atau penyakit yang tidak dapat disembuhkan;bahwa isteri tidak dapat melahirkan keturunan.

• Ada atau tidaknya persetujuan dari isteri, baik persetujuan lisan maupun tertulis, apabila persetujuan itu merupakan persetujuan lisan, persetujuan itu harus diucapkan didepan sidang pengadilan.

• Ada atau tidak adanya kemampuan suami untuk menjamin keperluan hidup isteri-isteri dan anak-anak, dengan memperlihatkan :
• surat keterangan mengenai penghasilan suami yang ditanda- tangani oleh bendahara tempat bekerja; atau
• surat keterangan pajak penghasilan; atau
• surat keterangan lain yang dapat diterima oleh Pengadilan;

• Ada atau tidak adanya jaminan bahwa suami akan berlaku adil terhadap isteri-isteri dan anak-anak mereka dengan pernyataan atau janji dari suami yang dibuat dalam bentuk yang ditetapkan untuk itu.

Oleh karenanya berdasarkan hal-hal yang telah diuraikan di atas, maka dapat disimpulkan prosedur pengajuan Permohonan Izin Poligami, diantaranya sebagai berikut :

1. Surat Permohonan rangkap 7 menggunakan kertas A4, disertai softcopy dalam bentuk CD/Flashdisk;
2. Fotokopi KTP Pemohon, Termohon dan Calon Isteri yang di Nazegelen dan leges di Kantor POS;
3. Fotokopi Kartu Keluarga yang di Nazegelen dan leges di Kantor POS;
4. Fotokopi Surat Nikah Pemohon yang di Nazegelen dan leges di Kantor POS;
5. Surat Keterangan status Calon Isteri dari Desa, Bila belum pernah Menikah (Bila Pernah terjadi perceraian melampirkan Fotokopi Akta Cerai);
6. Surat Keterangan penghasilan diketahui Desa/Kelurahan mengetahui Kecamatan;
7. Surat Ijin Atasan bila PNS yang di Nazegelen dan leges di Kantor POS;
8. Surat Pernyataan berlaku adil;
9. Surat Pernyataan tidak keberatan dimadu dari Termohon/Isteri Pertama, bermeterai cukup dan ditandatangani oleh 2 orang saksi menggunakan Kertas A4;
10. Surat Pernyataan tidak keberatan dimadu dari Calon Isteri;
11. Surat Keterangan pemisahan harta kekayaan;
12. Membayar Panjar Biaya Perkara berdasarkan radius.

Please scroll down for English translation.

Oleh: M.Syaifudin Syahrir, SH., MBA. - Mediator
Indonesia bersertifikat/Certified
Indonesian mediator.

Apa itu Mediasi?

Sengketa atau
perselisihan merupakan suatu keadaan dimana para pihak dalam suatu hubungan
antar masyarakat dan/atau antar masyarakat dengan pelaku bisnis maupun antar
pelaku bisnis terjadi suatu kondisi perbedaan kepentingan. Masing–masing pihak
dihadapkan pada sebuah situasi perbedaan dalam menginterpretasikan suatu hal,
suatu masalah dan lain sebagainya, karena adanya perbedaan kepentingan
masing–masing pihak.

Sengketa atau perselisihan
idealnya diupayakan penyelesaiannya terlebih dahulu melalui suatu pembicaraan
negosiasi oleh para pihak baik langsung maupun difasilitasi oleh pihak ketiga
yang netral melalui suatu proses mediasi yang difasilatasi oleh seorang atau
dua orang mediator untuk mencapai kondisi hasil akhir yaitu perdamaian antara
para pihak yang bersengketa berdasar “win-win solution” yang tidak
mengakibatkan salah satu pihak merasa dirugikan.

Namun demikian, tidak semua penyelesaian sengketa di luar pengadilan
dilakukan untuk mencapai “win-win solution”, karena kami mencatat terdapat
beberapa pendekatan lain yang umum digunakan
dalam penyelesaian sengketa berupa:

• Power based, yaitu menggunakan kekuatan, pemaksaan, ancaman, masalah
  “diselesaikan” atas paksaan pihak yang lebih kuat, yang dapat mengarah kepada
  suatu “penyelesaian semu”. Penyelesaian semu tersebut dapat membuat pihak yang merasa
  lebih lemah akan dapat tidak terima karena merasa bahwa penyelesaian tersebut
  tidak adil, tidak mengakomodasi kepentingannya dan lain sebagainya, sehingga
  akan terus menerus berupaya untuk tidak melaksanakan isi penyelesaian sengketa
  tersebut dengan berbagai macam cara dan upaya.

• Right based, yaitu masalah diselesaikan berdasarkan keputusan pihak lain yang
  bukan merupakan pihak-pihak yang bersengketa, salah satu contohnya adalah
  melalui suatu keputusan pengadilan, yang keputusannya adalah dapat berupa
  “menang atau kalah”. Keputusan penyelesaian berdasarkan right based dapat juga
  membuat pihak yang kalah akan dapat tidak terima karena merasa bahwa
  penyelesaian tersebut tidak adil, tidak mengakomodasi kepentingannya dan lain
  sebagainya, sehingga akan terus menerus berupaya untuk tidak melaksanakan isi keputusan
  penyelesaian sengketa tersebut dengan berbagai macam cara dan upaya, seperti
  upaya hukum gugat balik, melaporkan kepada kepolisian, banding, kasasi dan
  peninjauan kembali.

Proses penyelesaian sengketa
berdasarkan right based sebaiknya menjadi upaya terakhir setelah upaya
negosiasi dan mediasi mengalami kebuntuan, karena proses penyelesaian sengketa
tersebutdapat menjadi panjang, memakan waktu yang lama, memerlukan tenaga yang
tidak kecil, serta perlu pertimbangan finansial yang matang bagi suatu
perusahaan. Perlu dipertimbangkan pula bagi para pelaku bisnis apakah proses
tersebut dapat mempengaruhi kinerja dan reputasi dari perusahaannya dan
kelangsungan bisnisnya secara “smooth”.

• Interest based, yaitu masalah diselesaikan berdasarkan kepentingan pihak-pihak
  yang bersengketa untuk mencapai suatu “perdamaian” dengan mengemukakan
  penyelesaian secara “win-win solution” sehingga tidak ada pihak-pihak pihak
  yang bersengketa merasa dirugikan.

Penyelesaian masalah dengan cara ini
dilakukan melalui suatu proses negosiasi langsung antara para pihak, maupun
melalui proses negosiasi yang difasitasi oleh mediator untuk lebih melancarkan
dan menjebatani komunikasi antara pihak yang bersengketa, dimana proses
tersebut disebut mediasi.

Kapan Mediasi dilakukan?

Proses mediasi dapat dilakukan  sewaktu-waktu dan diluar suatu proses
pengadilan, apabila perundingan atau negosiasi yang dilakukan oleh para pihak
yang bersengketa mengalami kebuntuan dan telah gagal. Para pihak bisa juga
memilih untuk dilakukan suatu proses mediasi apabila merasa bahwa mereka tidak
dapat berkomunikasi dengan baik sehingga dapat mengarah pada kebuntuan apabila
dilakukan negosiasi langsung tanpa difasilitasi oleh mediator.

Proses mediasi juga merupakan bagian
dari suatu proses pengadilan perdata di Pengadilan Umum Indonesia, dimana
berdasarkan Peraturan Mahkamah Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia No. 1 Tahun
2016 Tentang Prosedur Mediasi Di Pengadilan dimana secara jelas dinyatakan dan
diatur bahwa pada dasarnya suatu proses mediasi wajib dilakukan oleh pihak yang
bersengketa dalam semua sengketa perdata di Pengadilan.

Proses mediasi dapat dilaksanakan
pula dalam proses penyelesaian sengketa lainnya melalui prosedur pada Lembaga
Lembaga proses penyelesaian sengketa lainnya, selain proses penyelesaian
sengketa melalui pengadilan perdata.

Apabila memerlukan penjelasan lebih
lanjut dan mendalam sehubungan dengan mediasi dapat menghubungi penulis.

English Translation:

WHAT IS MEDIATION IN ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
SETTLEMENT?

What is
Mediation?

Generally,
to define a condition which a conflict or dispute is emerging, we should have a
clarity that a situation where there is differences in interests between the
communities, the community and business actors, as well as between business
actors has occured. Each party is faced with a situation where there is a
differences in interpreting a matter between them, a problem has arise etc, caused
by the differences in the interests of each party.

Conflicts
or disputes should ideally be resolved first through negotiation talks by the
parties either directly or facilitated by a neutral third party through a
mediation process facilitated by one or two mediators to achieve the final result:
settlement between the disputing parties based on “win-win solution” that does
not result in either party feeling aggrieved.

However,
not every out of court settlement is carried out to reach “win-win solution”,
as we had recorded there are some other approach generally used in out of court
dispute resolution as follows:

• Power based, this
  approach is using force, coercion, threats, problems "resolved" by
  coercion from a stronger party, which can lead to a "false solution".
  This quasi-settlement can make parties who feel weaker will be unable to accept
  it because they feel that the settlement is unfair, does not accommodate their
  interests and so on, so that they will continue to try not to carry out the settlement
  reached under such dispute resolution by using various ways and efforts.

• Right based, i.e.
  problems are resolved based on the decisions of other parties who are not
  parties to the dispute, one example is through a court decision, the decision
  of which can be in the form of “win or lose”. Decisions based on rights based
  settlements can also make the losing party unable to accept it because they
  feel that the settlement is unfair, does not accommodate their interests and so
  on, so that they will continue to try not to carry out the resolutions/decisions/determinations
  issued on the dispute by using in various ways and efforts, such as further lawsuits,
  reporting the case to the police, petition for appeals, cassation and
  reconsideration.

The dispute
resolution process based on rights should be the last resort after negotiation
and mediation efforts are deadlocked, because the dispute resolution process does
require a long time period of minimum 10 months, time consuming, requires no
small amount of energy, and requires careful financial considerations for a
company. It is also necessary for business actors to consider whether the
process can affect the performance and reputation of the company and its
business continuity in a “smooth” manner.

• Interest based, i.e. problems are resolved based
  on the interests of the disputing parties to achieve an “amicable settlement”
  by proposing a “win-win solution” so that none of the disputing parties feel
  disadvantaged.

Problem
solving in this way is carried out through a direct negotiation process between
the parties, as well as through a negotiation process facilitated by the
mediator to further facilitate and bridge communication between the disputing
parties, where the process is called mediation.

So, when
does Mediation take place?

The
mediation process could take place at any time and outside a court process, if
the discussions or negotiations carried out by the disputing parties has
reached deadlock situations and considered as failed. The parties could also
choose to carry out a mediation process if they feel that they cannot
communicate well so that it can lead to a deadlock if a direct negotiations are
carried out without being facilitated by the mediator.

The
mediation process is also part of a civil court process in the Indonesian
General Court, regulated under the Regulation of the Supreme Court of the
Republic of Indonesia Number 1 of 2016 on Court Mediation Procedures. The
regulation clearly stated and stipualted that basically a mediation process
must be carried out by the disputing parties in all civil disputes in the Indonesian
Court.

The
mediation process could also be carried out in other dispute resolution
processes through procedures at other dispute resolution institutions, in
addition to the dispute resolution process through civil courts.

If you need
further and in-depth explanation regarding mediation, please feel free to
contact the author.