Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal IJEBD (International Journal Of Entrepreneurship And Business Development) Jurnal Impresi Indonesia
Alam, Peto Syamsul
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Evaluasi Kesesuaian Peraturan Lkpp No. 12 Tahun 2021 Terhadap UU Administrasi Pemerintahan No. 30 Tahun 2014 Alam, Peto Syamsul
Jurnal Impresi Indonesia Vol. 5 No. 1 (2026): Jurnal Impresi Indonesia
Publisher : Riviera Publishing

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58344/jii.v5i1.7457

Abstract

Government procurement is a strategic instrument in delivering public services and managing state finances, and therefore must be conducted in accordance with legal certainty, accountability, and the General Principles of Good Governance (Asas-Asas Umum Pemerintahan yang Baik/AUPB). Regulation of the National Public Procurement Agency Number 12 of 2021 (Perlem LKPP 12/2021) was enacted as a technical guideline for procurement through providers; however, its implementation raises several normative issues when examined in relation to Law Number 30 of 2014 on Government Administration (UU AP). This article aims to evaluate the compatibility of Perlem LKPP 12/2021 with the objectives and principles stipulated in UU AP 30/2014, to identify regulatory provisions that potentially create normative inconsistencies, and to propose recommendations for strengthening procurement governance. This study employs a normative juridical method using statutory, conceptual, and norm-mapping approaches. The findings indicate that several provisions of Perlem LKPP 12/2021—such as the authority of the Budget User Authority (KPA) as the final decision-maker in appeal objections, the obligation to submit a bid appeal guarantee amounting to 1% of the estimated contract value, ambiguous and multi-interpretable norms, non-affirmative advance payment arrangements for small enterprises, and one-sided performance evaluations of providers—are potentially inconsistent with the principles of legal certainty, prohibition of abuse of power, and legal protection as mandated by UU AP 30/2014. This article underscores the necessity of regulatory harmonization to ensure that technical procurement regulations do not exceed delegated authority, uphold legal protection, and promote fair, transparent, and accountable government procurement governance.
Application of the Principles of Good Faith and Pacta Sunt Servanda in Unequal Construction Contracts: A Case Study of B2B Developer–Contractor Setijanto, Augustinus; Permatasari, Corina; Artahana, Nana; Hadamean, Join; Alam, Peto Syamsul; Koeswanto, Arief; Anggoro, Prastiwo; Prihatinah, Tri Lisiani
IJEBD (International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Development) Vol 9 No 1 (2026): Jan - Feb 2026
Publisher : LPPM of NAROTAMA UNIVERSITY

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29138/ijebd.v9i1.3494

Abstract

The legal relationship between developers and contractors in business-to-business (B2B) construction contracts in Indonesia often shows a significant imbalance of power. Although formally the contract is made based on the principle of freedom of contract, substantively the legal relationship often deviates from the principles of fairness and balance that form the basis of contract law. This paper examines the application of two fundamental principles in contract law, namely good faith and pacta sunt servanda, which means that every agreement made legally is binding on the parties who made it (Article 1338 paragraph (1) of the Civil Code) in the practice of biased construction contracts, particularly when developers modify FIDIC standard contracts by removing or limiting clauses that are detrimental to their interests, such as the Dispute Avoidance/Adjudication Board (DAAB), the right to an extension of time (EoT), and the right to suspend payment. This study uses a normative-juridical approach with case and comparative analysis methods, examining actual practices between developers and contractors experiencing delays, variation orders, and payment delays. The results of the analysis show that the removal of these protective mechanisms not only creates the potential for structural default but also constitutes a violation of the principle of good faith in the implementation of contracts as stipulated in Article 1338 paragraph (3) of the Civil Code. Meanwhile, the pacta sunt servanda principle cannot be applied absolutely if the substance of the contract contains a striking imbalance and violates propriety (Article 1339 of the Civil Code). This paper offers an update in the form of a reinterpretation of the principle of good faith as a corrective instrument against exploitative clauses, as well as a proposal for the establishment of a national DAAB institution with proportional costs to uphold contractual justice. Thus, the application of contract law in construction contracts must be directed towards substantive balance and a fair relational relationship between developers and contractors, so that national development objectives can be achieved without causing protracted disputes.
Co-Authors Anggoro, Prastiwo Artahana, Nana Hadamean, Join Koeswanto, Arief Permatasari, Corina Setijanto, Augustinus Tri Lisiani Prihatinah