PEMANFAATAN HAK LINTAS KAPAL ASING DI PERAIRAN INDONESIA DAN PENEGAKAN HUKUMNYA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.arenahukum.2015.00803.4Keywords:
Kapal AsingAbstract
Abstract
This research aims to identify and understand the settings in Indonesian positive law on the use of traffic rights of foreign vessels in Indonesian waters . Related to that,Indonesian waters must be legally protected from the threat of violation of the law as a result of non-compliance with national and international laws and regulations. This research is a normative law approach legislation and the history in which the primary and secondary legal materials were analyzed qualitatively. The results showed that in accordance with applicable positive law, the legislation for law enforcement regarding the utilization of the rights of foreign vessels in Indonesian waters are still using Territoriale Zee en Maritieme Kringen Ordonnantie ( TZMKO ) or on the Territorial Sea and Maritime Environment 1939 is not in accordance with the UNCLOS 1982. This condition results in law enforcement in the sea that has not run optimally because the legislation has not shown any sectoral harmonization between one another. Recommendations of this research was to implement the harmonization of the laws regulating the use of the rights of foreign vessels traffic law enforcement in realizing optimal in Indonesian waters.
Abstrak
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui dan memahami pengaturan dalam hukum positif Indonesia tentang pemanfaatan hak-hak lintas kapal asing di Perairan Indonesia.Terkait hal tersebut, Perairan Indonesia harus dilindungi secara yuridis dari ancaman pelanggaran hukumsebagai akibat tidak dipatuhinya hukum nasional maupun internasional yang berlaku.Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan sejarah dimana bahan hukum primer dan sekunder dianalisis secara kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwasesuai dengan hukum positif yang berlaku, maka peraturan perundang-undangan untuk penegakan hukum mengenai pemanfaatan hak-hak kapal asing di Perairan Indonesia masih menggunakanTerritoriale Zee en Maritieme Kringen Ordonnantie (TZMKO) atau Ordonansi Laut Teritorial dan Lingkungan Maritim tahun 1939 yang sudah tidak sesuai dengan UNCLOS 1982. Kondisi ini berakibat pada penegakan hukum di laut yang belum berjalan dengan optimal karena perundang-undangan sektoral yang ada belum menunjukkan harmonisasi antara satu dengan yang lain. Rekomendasi penelitian ini adalah untuk melaksanakan harmonisasi hukum pengaturan pemanfaatan hak-hak lintas kapal asing dalam mewujudkan penegakan hukum di Perairan Indonesia yang optimal.
References
Buku
A.M. Tri Anggraini, 2003, Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat, Perpustakaan Nasional, Jakarta.
Andi Fahmy Lubis, et all, 2009, Persaingan Usaha antara Teks dan Konteks, Published and Printed with Support of Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH, Jakarta.
Asril Sitompul, 1999, Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat (Tinjauan terhadap Undang-Undang No. 5 Tahun 1999), Citra Aditya, Bandung.
Elyta Ras Ginting, 2001, Hukum Anti Monopoli Indonesia, Analisis dan Perbandingan UU No. 5 Tahun 1999, Citra Aditya Bakti, Bandung.
Herbert Hovenkamp, 1993, Antiturst, St. Paul Minnesota, West Publishing.
Henry R. Cheeseman, 2001, Business Law – Ethical, International & E-Commerce Enviroment, Fourth Edition, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Johnny Ibrahim, 2006, Hukum Persaingan Usaha: Filosofi, Teori dan Implikasi Penerapannya di Indonesia, Bayumedia Publishing, Malang.
Lawrence Anthony Sullivan, 1997, Antitrust, West Publishing, Co, St. Paul Minnesota.
L. Budi Kagramanto, 2008, Larangan Persekongkolan Tender (Prespektif Hukum Persaingan Usaha), Srikandi.
Munir Fuady, 1998, Hukum Anti Monopoli Menyongsong Era Persaingan Sehat, Citra Aditya Bakti, Jakarta.
Ningrum Sirait, 2004, Hukum Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia, Pustaka Bangsa Press, Medan.
Rahmadi Usman, 2012, Hukum Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia dalam Teori dan Praktik serta Penerapannya di Indonesia, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.
R. Sheyam Khemani and D. M. Shapiro, 1996, Glossary af Industrial Organisation Economics and Competition Law, OECD, Paris.
Susanti Adi Nugroho, 2001, Undang-undang Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia, Puslitbang/Diklat Mahkamah Agung.
Susanti Adi, 2012, Hukum Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia dalam Teori, Praktik dan Penerapannya, Kencana Prenada Media Grup, Jakarta.
Stephen F. Ross, 1993, Principles of Antitrust Law, The Foundation Press, Inc., Westbury New York.
Thomas E. Sullivan and Jeffrey L. Harrison, 1994, Understanding Antitrust and Its Economics Implications, Matthew Bender & Co., New York.
Jurnal
Robert H. Bork, The Rule of Reason and The Per se Concept: Price Fixing and Market Division, The Yale Law Journal, Volume 74, Januari 1996.
Syamsul Maarif, Tantangan Penegakan Undang-undang Persaingan di Indonesia, Jurnal Undang-undang Bisnis Volume 19, Mei – Juni 2002.
Yakub Adi Krisanto, Tarif SMS. Penetapan Harga dan Perlindungan Pengguna di Pasaran Telekomunikasi Seluler di Indonesia, Jurnal Hukum Bisnis. Volume 28 No. 2, 2009.
Peter Nealis, Per se Legality; a new Standart in Antitrust Adjudication Under the Rule of Reason, Ohio St. Law Journal, Volume 61 No. 347, 2000.
Makalah
Ahmad Junaidi, 2013, Asas Comity dan Hukum Persaingan di ASEAN, Media Berkala Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha, Edisi 42.
J. David Reizel, et.al. 2001, Contemporary Business Law, McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, Fourth Edition.
Sukarmi, 2007, Persaingan Sehat dalam Pelaksanaan Pengadaan Barangan/Perkhidmatan, Kertas kerja dalam Semiloka “Optimalisasi Pengadaan Barangan dan Perkhidmatan di RS†di Hotel Aston Atrium Senen, Jakarta.
Syamsul Maarif dan B.C. Rikrik Rizkiyana, Posisi Undang-undang Persaingan Usaha dalam Sistem Undang-undang Nasional, disampaikan sebagai bahan bacaan seminar sehari “Refleksi Lima Tahun UU No. 5/1999â€, Jakarta / Surabaya, Maret 2004.
James E. Hartley, 1999, The Rule of Reason, American Bar Association (ABA), Monograph No. 23.
Artikel
KPPU, Frequently Asked Question (FAQ), www. kppu.go.id.
http://warkahdaily.blogspot.com/2010/07/a k t a - p e r s a i n g a n - 2 0 1 0-dikuatkuasa-2012.html. Akta Persaingan 2010 Dikuatkuasa 2012 Wujud Persaingan Sihat Dalam Industry, Kuala Lumpur, 5 Juli 2010, http://bisnis.news.viva.co.id/news/read/174056-dagang-indonesiamalaysia--siapa-untung-.
Thomas Misslin, Recent Developments in the Rule of Reason dan Per Se Standars in American Antitrst Law.
Yakub Adi Krisanto, Prinsip Rule of reason dan Per se rule dalam Undang-undang Persaingan Indonesia, http://yakubadikrisanto.wordpress.com/2008/06/03/prinsip-rule-ofreason-dan-per-se-illegal/.
Menteri Perdagangan Dalam Negeri, Koperasi dan Kepenggunaan Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob, http://warkahdaily.b l o g s p o t . c o m / 2 0 1 0 / 0 7 / a k t a -
persaingan-2010-dikuatkuasa-2012.html, Akta Persaingan 2010 Dikuatkuasa 2012 Wujud Persaingan Sihat Dalam Industry, Kuala Lumpur, 5 Juli 2010.
Peraturan Perundang-undangan
Akta Persaingan 2010 Malaysia.
Undang-undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat.
Sherman Act 1890.
Garis Panduan Bab 1 Larangan Perjanjian Anti-Persaingan.
Putusan dan Kasus
Putusan Nomor 01/KPPU-L/2003, mengenai Integrasi Vertikal oleh PT Garuda Indonesia.
Putusan KPPU Nomor 09/KPPU-L/2009 Mengenai Praktek Monopoli dan/atau Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat atas Akuisisi PT Alfa Retailindo.
Putusan Perkara Nomor 07/KPPU-L/2007, KPPU melakukan analisa terhadap dampak dari Cross-ownership yang dilakukan Kelompok Temasek.
United States vs. Trans-Missouri Freight Association, 166 U.S. 290, 17 S. Ct. 540, 41 L. Ed., 1007 (1897). United States vs. Trans-Missouri Freight Association, 171 U.S. 505, 19 S. Ct. 25, 43 L. Ed., 259 (1898).
Standart Oil Co. of N.J. vs United States, 221 U.S. 1,31 S. Ct. 502, %% L. Ed. 619 (1911).
Chicago Board of Trade vs. United States, 246 U.S. 231 (1918).
Standard Oil, Co. v. United States, 221 U.S. 1, 31 S.Ct. 502, 55 L. Ed. 619 (1911).
Topco v United States, 405 U.S.
Kasus National Society of Professional Engineers v. United States, 435 U.S.
MyCC’s Decision Against to Malaysian Airline System Berhad, AirAsia Berhad and AirAsia X Sdn. Bhd, Kes Nombor.
MyCC.0001.2012. MyCC’s Decision Against to Malaysian Airline System Berhad, AirAsia Berhad and AirAsia X Sdn. Bhd, Putusan Nomor. MyCC.0001.2012.
Kamus
Bryan A. Graner, 2004, Black’s Law Dictionary, Eighth Edition.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Suharyono Kartawijaya

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This journal embed or display simple machine-readable CC licensing information. This journal allow reuse and remixing of content in accordance with a Creative Commons license, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY NC). This license (CC BY NC) allows other users to re-edit / rewrite and rebuild a work non-commercially as long as the user gives credit and licenses his new work in the same domain.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY NC) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).