scholarly journals TRANSFORMASI DAN PENGAWASAN KEUANGAN NEGARA PADA BUMN DENGAN PRINSIP BUSINESS JUDGMENT RULE

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-203
Author(s):  
Nur Rohim Yunus ◽  
Latipah Nasution
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Business Decision ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
State Finance ◽  
Business Entities

Abstract, State assets in the form of shares of business entities are not state assets, but have been transformed into business entity assets. Likewise, government officials who become Directors/Commissioners and other shareholders have an equal position with private shareholders. The Board of Directors in carrying out their duties and authorities has the authority and protection in every business decision making, but this does not escape supervision through the BJR (Business Judgment Rule) principle, as contained in the Limited Liability Company Law. This study uses a qualitative research method with a statutory approach. The purpose of this study is to understand the criteria for state finances in SOEs and the legal consequences of financial losses and supervision of SOEs. The results of the study stated that the implementation of BJR on the Board of Directors of SOEs could be carried out after fulfilling the terms and conditions of the enactment of BJR. BJR can be implemented because a legal entity is actually subject to the Limited Liability Company law. Keywords: Supervision of SOEs ion; Business Judgment Rules; State Finance   Intisari: Kekayaan negara yang berbentuk saham dari badan usaha bukan merupakan kekayaan negara, tetapi telah bertransformasi menjadi kekayaan badan usaha. Demikian terhadap pejabat pemerintah yang menjadi Direksi/Komisaris dan pemegang saham lainnya memiliki kedudukan yang setara dengan pemegang saham swasta. Direksi dalam menjalankan tugas dan wewenang memiliki kewenangan dan perlindungan dalam setiap pengambilan keputusan bisnis, namun ini tak luput dari pengawasan melalui prinsip BJR (Business Judgment Rule), sebagaimana termuat dalam Undang-Undang Perseroan Terbatas. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian kualitatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan. Tujuan penelitian untuk dapat memahami kriteria keuangan negara pada BUMN dan akibat hukum kerugian keuangan dan pengawasan pada BUMN. Hasil penelitian menyatakan bahwa implementasi BJR terhadap Direksi BUMN dapat dilakukan setelah memenuhi syarat dan ketentuan berlakunya BJR. BJR dapat diimplementasikan karena badan usaha berbadan hukum sejatinya tunduk pada undang-undang Perseroan Terbatas. Kata Kunci: Pengawasan BUMN; Business Judgment Rule; Kuangan Negara

scholarly journals Implementation of the Doctrine of the Business Judgment Rule on Bankruptcy Law in Indonesia

Yuridika ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Andika Wijaya
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Bankruptcy Law ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
Accounts Payable ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Oriented Research

One of the mechanisms that can be taken in resolving accounts payable to a limited liability company in bankruptcy. In the case of bankruptcy due to mistakes made personally by the Board of Directors and the Board of Commissioners, they must be responsible for debts held by limited liability companies. The company law regulates the way for the Board of Directors and Board of Commissioners to avoid liability for losses suffered by the company, through the doctrine of the Business Judgment Rule (BJR). In practice, the application of the BJR doctrine in bankruptcy law is characterized by differences in interpretation between law enforcers. Differences in interpretation occur because there is no clear provision in the Republic of Indonesia Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Delay of Obligations to Pay Debt (Law No. 37/2004) which limits the filing of bankruptcy applications to the personal Directors and Board of Commissioners. The research in this article is carried out by reform-oriented research methods, to make changes to Law No. 37/2004 to clarify the application of the BJR doctrine in bankruptcy law in Indonesia. With the implementation of legal reform, it is expected that there will be no difference in interpretation regarding the application of the BJR doctrine to bankruptcy law at the Commercial Court in Indonesia.

scholarly journals KELEMAHAN NORMATIF PENGATURAN TINDAK PIDANA DALAM PASAL 2 DAN PASAL 3 UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 31 TAHUN 1999 TENTANG PEMBERANTASAN TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI DAN PERUBAHANNYA SERTA UPAYA PENYEMPURNAANNYA DALAM RANGKA PEMENUHAN KEWENANGAN DIREKSI BUMD YANG BERBENTUK

Legal Spirit ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Billy Pahlevy Islamy
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Principle Of Legality

The results of this research are as follows: First, Article 2 and Article 3 of the Anti-Corruption Act does not meet the principles in the formulation of a crime namely lex certa (must be clear and not multiple interpretations) and lex stricta means the formulation of the criminal act must be interpreted firmly and strictly and is prohibited from analogizing so it is not prohibited from analogizing. reflecting legal certainty and contradicting Article 28 D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. The limitation for the Board of Directors to achieve legal certainty and justice is the application of the Business Judgment Rule principle as regulated in the Limited Liability Company Law. Law enforcers must always pay attention and uphold the principle of legality in law enforcement, which reflects legal certainty.Key words: Corruption Crime, Board of Directors Authority, Regional Owned Enterprises (BUMD) Persero Company.

scholarly journals PROGRESIFITAS HUKUM PENGEMBALIAN DEVIDEN SAHAM INTERIM PERSEROAN TERBATAS PADA UUPT NO.40 TAHUN 2007

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Bella Mutiara Wahab
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Stock Exchange ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Dividend Distribution ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Annual Book

AbstractProgressive law must place the law in a very close position with the law's community or stakeholders. This position is called responsive, progressive law and is always associated with stakeholders' reality and needs to create justice and happiness as law aspired itself. Also, progressive law emphasizes social integration to overcome public moral insularity.Starting from the viewpoint of progressive law, the author looks at the laws and regulations that discuss the return of interim dividends as stated in the Limited Liability Company Law No. 40 of 2007, article 72, article 72 states that companies allow rules related to dividend distribution in a temporary (interim) way. The article is then interpreted as that if the company has positive profits, the company is allowed to distribute dividends before the company closes the book at the end of the year, provided that the board of directors officially announces the distribution with the approval of the GMS that the positive profits obtained by the company before closing the book will come as dividends interim. As a result, the company competes to distribute interim dividends to increase and show its credibility to investors. It was recorded on the Indonesian stock exchange (IDX) that in September 2020, 73 companies distributed interim dividends.However, article 72 paragraph 5 of the Limited Liability Company Law No. 40 of 2007 explains that if after the company distributes interim dividends to shareholders and at the end of the closing of the annual book the company suffers a loss, the shareholders must return the dividends they have received. If the shareholder does not return it, the directors and commissioners are jointly responsible for covering the company's losses.This viewpoint is the basis for finding the location of the value and form of legal progressivity regarding the mechanism of interim share dividends in limited liability companies as stated in UUPT No.40 of 2007 Article 72 using a normative research method with a conceptual approach. 

scholarly journals BUSINESS JUDGEMENT RULE SEBAGAI PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI DIREKSI PERSEROAN DALAM MELAKUKAN TRANSAKSI BISNIS

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Gary Gagarin Akbar
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Business Decisions ◽  
Business Decision ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
Company Directors ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Definition Of

ABSTRAK Direksi mempunyai peran yang sangat vital bagi perseroan. Direksi ibarat nyawa bagi perseroan, tidak mungkin suatu perseroan tanpa adanya direksi. Direksi bertugas sebagai perwakilan perseroan dalam menjalankan perseroan. Dalam prakteknya, direksi sering kali dirugikan akibat keputusan bisnis yang diambilnya. Hal ini diakibatkan oleh belum adanya harmonisasi undang-undang mengenai definisi keuangan negara sehingga memungkinkan direksi dikenakan tindak pidana korupsi jika direksi dalam mengambil keputusan bisnis menimbulkan kerugian bagi perseroan. Jika direksi dalam mengambil suatu keputusan tidak mendapatkan perlindungan hukum maka direksi menjadi takut untuk mengadakan transaksi bisnis. Karena itu dalam hal ini sangat dibutuhkan doktrin Business Judgement Rule sebagai perlindungan hukum bagi direksi dalam melakukan transaksi bisnis agar mereka bisa menjalankan tugasnya dengan maksimal. Selain itu, jika direksi membuat keputusan bisnis yang menimbulkan kerugian untuk perseroan dikarenakan ultra vires atau melampaui kewenangan yang telah ditentukan dalam anggaran dasar atau peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku, maka direksi tersebut tidak bisa dilindungi oleh doktrin Business Judgement Rule. Dalam hal direksi melakukan tindakan ultra vires, maka direksi tersebut dapat dikenakan Pasal 97 ayat (3) UUPT, pasal ini menyatakan bahwa setiap anggota direksi bertanggung jawab penuh sampai pada harta pribadi apabila direksi tersebut melakukan kesalahan atau kelalaian yang mengakibatkan perseroan mengalami kerugian, kemudian direksi BUMN juga dapat dikenakan Pasal 1365 mengenai perbuatan melawan hukum yang mengakibatkan kerugian pada orang lain, maka harus membayar ganti rugi kepada pihak yang dirugikan. Kata Kunci: Direksi, BUMN, Business Judgement Rule ABSTRACT Directors have a very important role for company. Directors like soul of the company, impossible a company without directors. Directors served as representative of the company in running the company. In practice, directors are often adversely affected business decision taken. This is caused by the absence of harmonization of legislation on the definition of state finances so as to enable the directors subject to corruption if the directors in making business decisions result in losses for the company. If the directors in taking a decision not to get legal protection, the directors be afraid to conduct business transactions. Therefore in this case is necessary doctrine of Business Judgment Rule as legal protection for directors in the transaction of business so that they can carry out their duties to the fullest. In addition, if directors make business decisions causing losses to the company due to the ultra vires or beyond the authority specified in the statutes or regulations applicable law, the directors can not be protected by the doctrine of the Business Judgment Rule. In the event that the directors act ultra vires, the directors may be subject to Article 97 paragraph (3) of legislation limited liability company, this article states that each member of the board of directors fully responsible to the personal property if the directors of wrongdoing or negligence which resulted in the company at a disadvantage, then the board of directors SOE also be subject to Article 1365 of the unlawful act that caused financial losses to others, it must pay compensation to the injured party. Keywords : Directors, State Owned Enterprises, Business Judgement Rule (BJR)

scholarly journals KEPUTUSAN BISNIS DAN TANGGUNGJAWAB DIREKSI DALAM PRINSIP FIDUCIARY DUTIES PADA PERSEROAN TERBATAS

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 37-56
Author(s):  
Ali Muhayatsyah
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
General Principle ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Fiduciary Duty ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Fiduciary Duties ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Full Sense

The main party charged with fiduciary duty is the board of directors. In UUPT No. 40/2007 it does not specifically regulate fiduciary duty but rather regulates general principles. From the general principle of fiduciary duty, directors in managing the company must pay attention to the interests of the company above other interests; directors must act in accordance with the aims and objectives of the company (intra vires), and pay attention to the limitations and restrictions determined by the law and the articles of association of the company. In carrying out their duties as directors, they are required to have in good faith and in full sense of responsibility; Directors must carry out their duties diligently, carefully, and smartly and skillfully. Keywords: Directors, Fiduciary Duty, Business Judgment Rule, Limited Liability Company,   Abstrak Pihak utama yang dibebankan kewajiban fiduciary duty adalah direksi. Dalam UUPT Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tidak mengatur secara khusus mengenai fiduciary duty tetapi mengatur prinsip-prinsip umumnya. Dari prinsip umum fiduciary duty makadireksi dalam mengurus perseroan harus memperhatikan kepentingan perseroan di atas kepentingan lainnya;direksi harus bertindak sesuai dengan maksud dan tujuan perseroan (intra vires), serta memperhatikan batasan dan larangan yang ditentukan UU dan anggaran dasar Perseroan. Dalam melaksanakan tugas sebagai direksi, diharuskan memiliki itikad baik (in good faith) dan tanggung jawab (in full sense of responsibility); Direksi harus melaksanakan tugasnya dengan rajin (diligently), penuh kehati-hatian (carefully), dan pintar serta terampil (skillfully). Kata kunci: Direksi, Fiduciary Duty, Business Judgement Rule, Perseroan Terbatas,

scholarly journals Responsibilities of the Board of Directors in the Bankruptcy of the Limited Liability Company

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 66
Author(s):  
Padriadi Wiharjokusumo ◽  
Novita Romauli Saragih
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Full Responsibility ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Data Source

Article 97 paragraph (1) of the Company Law requires each member of the Board of Directors to be required in good faith and full responsibility to undertake the supervision of the company for the interests and business of the company. This implies the Board of Directors is liablefor each management and representation of the company in the company’s framework in pursuing its purposes and objectives.This  researchexaminesthe responsibilities of the board of Directors in the bankruptcy of the Limited Liability Company based on Law No. 40 of 2007. This research was conducted through a normative juridical approach.The  data  source  of  this  research  was  gained from the library study. Then  it  was  analyzed  using the qualitative  analysis  which depicts and dissects the significant information.The conclusion  of  this  research is  thatthe responsibilities of the Board of Directors in Bankruptcy Limited Liability Company based on Law No. 40 of 2007 comprises 2 (two) aspects, in particular; civil liability and criminal liability.

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTASI DOKTRIN BUSINESS JUDGEMENT RULE DI INDONESIA

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-87
Author(s):  
Muhamad Hafizh Akram ◽  
Nisriina Primadani Fanaro
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Business Decisions ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Do So

The Board of Directors is one of the most important organs in a Limited Liability Company. Management of the Company that carried out by the board of directors includes running business activities, controlling, and making business decisions that have an impact on a Limited Liability Company whether the decision will cause loss or profit. In making business decisions, the Board of Directors must do so in the manner of good faith, carefully, and in accordance with the aims and objectives of the Company's establishment. If the directors already made the decision the correct manner, they cannot be held personally accountable for the decisions they make. That is what a Business judgment rules is, a doctrine that provides protection to directors to not be personally responsible if the business decisions taken cause losses to the company. Relying on a literature study, the business judgment rule is implicitly regulated in article 92 paragraph 1 and 97 paragraph 5 of Law no. 40 of 2007 regarding the Limited Liability Companies, several cases related to the business judgment rule, this article intends to analyze the implementation of the doctrine of the business judgment rule in Indonesia

scholarly journals ANALISIS YURIDIS PEMBERHENTIAN ANGGOTA DIREKSI DENGAN TANPA DIDAHULUI ADANYA PEMBELAAN DIRI DALAM RUPS [JURIDIC ANALYSIS REGARDING TERMINATION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS WITHOUT SELF DEFENSE IN THE GENERAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS]

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 133
Author(s):  
Felicia Darlene
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
General Meeting ◽  
Company Law ◽  
District Court ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Bahasa Indonesia

<em>One of the sectors being developed by the Indonesian government is economic growth, which impact on increasing Limited Liability Companies. Provisions that contain procedures for managing a Limited Liability Company are regulated in Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies (UU PT), one of which is the procedure for dismissing members of the Board of Directors. Article 105 of the Company Law stipulates that the dismissal of a member of the Board of Directors is taken after the person concerned is given the opportunity to defend himself. Furthermore, regarding legal protection for the dismissal of members of the Board of Directors who violate the provisions of the Company Law. The Law on Judicial Power regulates the absolute competence of each judiciary. With absolute competence, each judicial body has different jurisdiction to judge. The method used in this study is normative juridical. The results and conclusions of this study are that the dismissal of members of the Board of Directors without any prior self-defense in the GMS is invalid if the members of the Board of Directors object to his dismissal. Legal protection for members of the Board of Directors who are dismissed not in accordance with the provisions of the Company Law is to file a lawsuit to the District Court.<br /><br /></em><strong>BAHASA INDONESIA ABSTRACT:</strong><p>Salah satu sektor yang sedang dikembangkan oleh pemerintah Indonesia adalah pertumbuhan ekonomi, yang berdampak pada meningkatnya Perseroan Terbatas. Ketentuan yang memuat tata cara pengurusan Perseroan Terbatas diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas (UU PT), salah satunya adalah tata cara pemberhentian anggota Direksi. Dalam Pasal 105 UU PT diatur bahwa keputusan pemberhentian anggota Direksi diambil setelah yang bersangkutan diberi kesempatan untuk membela diri. Selanjutnya mengenai perlindungan hukum atas pemberhentian anggota Direksi yang melanggar ketentuan UU PT. Undang-Undang Kekuasaan Kehakiman mengatur mengenai kompetensi absolut setiap peradilan. Dengan adanya kompetensi absolut, maka setiap badan peradilan mempunyai yurisdiksi mengadili yang berbeda-beda. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif. Hasil dan kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah pemberhentian anggota Direksi dengan tanpa didahului adanya pembelaan diri dalam RUPS adalah tidak sah jika anggota Direksi keberatan atas pemberhentian dirinya. Perlindungan hukum bagi anggota Direksi yang diberhentikan tidak sesuai dengan ketentuan UUPT adalah mengajukan gugatan ke Pengadilan Negeri.</p>

scholarly journals Tanggung Jawab dan Perlindungan Hukum Direksi dalam Pengurusan Perseroan Terbatas

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-137
Author(s):  
Raffles Raffles
Keyword(s):  
Legal Protection ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Personal Accountability ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Personal Liability

This article discusses the responsibilities of directors and their legal protection in managing a limited liability company. The responsibility of the directors in managing a limited liability company as regulated in the 2007 Company Law is related to the duties and authority to run the management of the company for the benefit of the company and in accordance with the aims and objectives of the company. To carry out the management of the company, the directors are authorized to carry out the management of the company in accordance with policies deemed appropriate, within the limits specified in the 2007 Company Law and/or articles of association. The responsibility of members of the directors for the company’s losses can be seen from the nature of the responsibility is personal and collective. The directors’ liability is personal if the loss suffered by the company is due to an error or negligence of the individual members of the board of directors. The responsibility of the directors is collective if the company’s losses are caused by an error or negligence in the board’s decision or action. Legal protection for directors in company management is provided if the management is based on good faith and prudence, which is recognized as the business judgment rule doctrine. Basically, directors are responsible for all actions and decisions they make, even personal accountability. However, directors can avoid personal liability if they can prove the basis and reasons and are based on good faith and caution. Abstrak Artikel ini membahas tanggung jawab dan perlindungan hukum direksi dalam pengurusan perseroan terbatas. Pertanggungjawaban direksi dalam pengurusan perseroan terbatas sebagaimana diatur dalam UUPT Tahun 2007 terkait dengan tugas dan wewenangnya menjalankan pengurusan perseroan untuk kepentingan perseroan dan sesuai dengan maksud dan tujuan perseroan. Untuk menjalankan pengurusan perseroan, direksi berwenang menjalankan pengurusan perseroan sesuai dengan kebijakan yang dipandang tepat, dalam batas yang ditentukan dalam UUPT Tahun 2007 dan/atau anggaran dasar. Pertanggungjawaban anggota direksi atas kerugian perseroan dilihat dari sifat pertanggungjawabannya bersifat pribadi dan kolektif. Pertanggungjawaban direksi bersifat pribadi apabila kerugian yang dialami perseroan disebabkan kesalahan atau kelalaian individu anggota direksi. Pertanggungjawaban direksi bersifat kolektif apabila kerugian perseroan diakibatkan adanya kesalahan atau kelalaian dalam keputusan atau tindakan dewan direksi. Perlindungan hukum terhadap direksi dalam pengurusan perusahaan diberikan jika pengurusan tersebut didasarkan pada itikad baik dan hati-hati, yang dikenali sebagai doktrin business judgement rule. Pada dasarnya direksi bertanggung jawab atas segala tindakan dan keputusan yang dibuatnya, bahkan pertanggungjawaban pribadi. Namun demikian, direksi dapat terhindar dari tuntutan pertanggungjawaban secara pribadi apabila dapat membuktikan dasar dan alasannya dan didasarkan pada itikad aik dan hati-hati.

scholarly journals The Implementation of Business Judgment Rule Principle in Managing the Company

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Busyra Azheri ◽  
Upita Anggunsuri
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Business Decision ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
Good Corporate Governance ◽  
Reputation Risk ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Credit Agreement ◽  
Branch Office

A business decision is very important to determine the quality of the Board of Directors in carrying out their duties professionally and responsibly as expected by Good Corporate Governance (GCG). The effectiveness of the Board of Directors is the center of the implementation of Good Corporate Governance. Bank Business is very risky (such: credit risk, reputation risk, etc.). The Board of Directors in making a business decision, will always face unpredictable condition. In Banking practice, the Head of Branch Office Bank is the extension of Director, if the Head of Branch Office Bank signs credit agreement out of the rules (plafond). His action has categorized as ultra vires, so the consequence is the Head of Branch Office Bank can be held responsible for his action. In this case, the Board of Directors has not taken responsibility for the action of the Head of Branch Bank, based on Business Judgment Principle, the Director has not taken its responsibility for ultra vires act which is done by the Head of Branch Office Bank, as along as Director has managed the Company in good faith, carefully and does not against the law. Therefore, Business Judgment Principle gives legal protection to the Director in making a business decision

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document