Execution of the Asset Seizure of State-Owned Enterprise PT PAL Indonesia Pursuant to an International Arbitration Award (Case Study: Central Jakarta District Court Order No. 038.2012.EKS Dated July 12, 2012)

Jessie

Tarumanagara Law Review
Vol. 3 No. I (2021): Talrev-Untar

Based on Law Number 19 of 2003 concerning State Owned Enterprises Article 11 states that: "Against Persero all provisions and principles that apply to limited liability companies apply as stipulated in Act Number 1 of 1995 concerning Limited Liability Companies" Therefore the State Owned Enterprises in the form of Persero must comply with the Law of PT. But in the Case of High Court Number 038.2012.EKS, PT. PAL (PERSERO) did not proceed accordingly, PT.PAL did not want to carry out the Court's Decision which has a permanent legal force because of differences in views with Law Number 1 of 2004 concerning State Treasury which states that: "Any party is prohibited confiscating state property "So that it creates legal problems that need to be further investigated, namely how is the Application of Law on Execution of Assets of State-Owned Enterprises in the event of a lawsuit from another party? And how is the application of Article 11 of Law Number 19 of 2003 concerning State-Owned Enterprises to the Assets of State-Owned Enterprises in the Decision of the High Court Number: 038.2012.EKS tertanggal 12 Juli 2012? The results showed, in Law Number 19 of 2003 concerning BUMN could not be implemented and could not provide legal certainty due to differences in views with Law Number 1 of 2004 concerning State Treasury. Law Number 19 of 2003 concerning BUMN Article 11 is considered not harmonizing with Law Number 1 of 2004 concerning State Treasury Article 50.