Land Management Rights Before and After the Government Regulation in Lieu of Job Creation Law

Penta Peturun
{"title":"Land Management Rights Before and After the Government Regulation in Lieu of Job Creation Law","authors":"Penta Peturun","doi":"10.25041/aelr.v4i1.2947","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are regulations regarding land management rights (HPL) in Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation in Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 2 of 2022 concerning Job Creation. The background is the birth of the Investment policy made by President Joko Widodo's Government. HPL is regulated separately as a “right”, whereas in the Basic Regulations on Agrarian Principles (UUPA) which is the source of law, there is no mention of “rights”. Related to the authority of the State's Right to Control (HMN). The Government Regulation transfers HPL as a whole to certain parties. There should be a role for regulators and operators participating in planning, implementation and supervision. Therefore, there must be clarity on the position of the authority “controlled by the state” for HMN constitutionally against HPL in Government Regulations that refer to the constitution. In a normative legal approach, Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution mandates the state to conduct beleid, bestuursdaad, regelendaad, beheersdaad, tezichthoudensdaad. Philosophically, the government functions as a regulator and operator. As an operator, the Government carries out its duties as a coach and supervisor by directly implementing activities. This is confirmed in the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 001-21-22-PUUI 2003 on HMN. Suppose HPL in the Government Regulation is released. In that case, it is not much different from embracing the concept of nachtwachternstaat or night watchman state, not the principle of welvaarstaat which fully utilizes the control of wealth sources for the greatest prosperity of the people. As it should be, HPL in HMN can provide direction for law enforcers and stakeholders with a role and authority in the land acquisition process.","PeriodicalId":52589,"journal":{"name":"Administrative and Environmental Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administrative and Environmental Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25041/aelr.v4i1.2947","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

There are regulations regarding land management rights (HPL) in Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation in Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 2 of 2022 concerning Job Creation. The background is the birth of the Investment policy made by President Joko Widodo's Government. HPL is regulated separately as a “right”, whereas in the Basic Regulations on Agrarian Principles (UUPA) which is the source of law, there is no mention of “rights”. Related to the authority of the State's Right to Control (HMN). The Government Regulation transfers HPL as a whole to certain parties. There should be a role for regulators and operators participating in planning, implementation and supervision. Therefore, there must be clarity on the position of the authority “controlled by the state” for HMN constitutionally against HPL in Government Regulations that refer to the constitution. In a normative legal approach, Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution mandates the state to conduct beleid, bestuursdaad, regelendaad, beheersdaad, tezichthoudensdaad. Philosophically, the government functions as a regulator and operator. As an operator, the Government carries out its duties as a coach and supervisor by directly implementing activities. This is confirmed in the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 001-21-22-PUUI 2003 on HMN. Suppose HPL in the Government Regulation is released. In that case, it is not much different from embracing the concept of nachtwachternstaat or night watchman state, not the principle of welvaarstaat which fully utilizes the control of wealth sources for the greatest prosperity of the people. As it should be, HPL in HMN can provide direction for law enforcers and stakeholders with a role and authority in the land acquisition process.
以《创造就业法》代替政府管制前后的土地经营权
关于创造就业机会的2020年第11号法律中有关于土地管理权(HPL)的规定,而不是关于创造就业的2022年第2号法律中的政府条例。背景是佐科·维多多总统政府制定的投资政策的诞生。HPL是作为一项“权利”单独规定的,而在作为法律来源的《土地原则基本条例》中,没有提及“权利”。与国家控制权有关。《政府条例》将HPL作为一个整体转让给某些方面。监管机构和运营商应参与规划、实施和监督。因此,在提及宪法的政府条例中,必须明确HMN“由国家控制”的权力机构在宪法上反对HPL的立场。在一种规范的法律方法中,1945年宪法第33条规定国家进行beleid、bestuursdaad、regelendaad、beeersdaad、tezichthoudensdaad。从哲学上讲,政府是一个监管者和经营者。作为一个经营者,政府通过直接开展活动来履行其教练和监督员的职责。印度尼西亚共和国宪法法院2003年第001-21-22-PUUI号关于HMN的裁决确认了这一点。假设政府规例中的HPL已经发布。在这种情况下,这与接受nachtwachternstaat或守夜人国家的概念没有太大区别,而不是完全利用对财富来源的控制来实现人民最大繁荣的welvaarstaat原则。事实上,HMN的HPL可以为在土地征用过程中发挥作用和权威的执法者和利益相关者提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信