Rechtsidee

Vol. 10 No. 2 (2022): December
Environmental Law

Liability of Mining Companies Related to Environmental Pollution in the Perspective of Prophetic Law: Pertanggungjawaban Perusahaan Tambang Terkait Pencemaran Lingkungan dalam Perspektif Hukum Profetik

View Article
Similarity Report
  • St. Muslimah Suciati,
  • Asri Sarif,
  • Rasmuddin,
  • Arfa Arfa
St. Muslimah Suciati
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Halu Oleo
Asri Sarif
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Halu Oleo
Rasmuddin
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Halu Oleo
Arfa Arfa
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Halu Oleo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21070/jihr.v11i0.955

Published 2022-12-07

Keywords

  • Prophetic Law,
  • Environmental Pollution,
  • Corporate Responsibility

How to Cite

Suciati, S. M., Sarif, A. ., Rasmuddin, & Arfa, A. (2022). Liability of Mining Companies Related to Environmental Pollution in the Perspective of Prophetic Law: Pertanggungjawaban Perusahaan Tambang Terkait Pencemaran Lingkungan dalam Perspektif Hukum Profetik. Rechtsidee, 10(2), 10.21070/jihr.v11i0.955. https://doi.org/10.21070/jihr.v11i0.955
Copyright Notice
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

This study aims to analyze aspects of mining company liability related to environmental pollution in the perspective of prophetic law. A review of prophetic law is used as an analytical knife to confirm the existence of prophetic law, one of which emphasizes "unity" between the interests of humans and the universe (including the environment). This research is a normative legal research by prioritizing the concept and statutory approach. The results of the study confirm that proper legal responsibility for mining companies if it is proven that there is environmental pollution in a preventive manner or prevention, mining companies need to anticipate that before mining companies carry out mining activities, they must submit a post-mining reclamation plan and provide a post-mining reclamation guarantee fund. Then in the implementation of mining activities supervision must be carried out continuously and negotiate/persuade or supervise so that mining companies carry out their mining activities in compliance with permit conditions and other conditions for carrying out environmentally sound mining activities. Viewed from the perspective of prophetic law, legal accountability for mining companies in relation to environmental pollution is actually in accordance with three aspects of prophetic law, namely aspects of transcendence, humanization, and liberation. Therefore, in order to make law enforcement effective regarding legal liability for mining companies in relation to environmental pollution, it is necessary to harmonize and synchronize laws and regulations as well as the need for efforts to maintain coherence between statutory regulations and practice in the field.

View Article
Similarity Report

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. N. L. Pohwain, J. J. Pietersz, and R. V. Rugebregt, “Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Masyarakat Hukum Adat Yang Lingkungan Hidupnya Tercemar,” TATOHI J. Ilmu Huk., vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 508–516, 2021.
  2. D. E. P. Adam Ilyas, “Problematika Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi dan Implikasinya,” Konstitusi, vol. 19, no. 4, p. 807, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1943
  3. Ibrahim, Pengelolaan Badan Usaha Milik Desa di Kawasan Tambang, 1st ed. Yogyakarta: LeutikaPrio, 2018.
  4. A. Suherman, “Esensi Asas Legalitas dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana Lingkungan,” Bina Huk. Lingkung., vol. 5, no. 1, p. 135, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24970/bhl.v5i1.133
  5. P. Haryadi, Penyelesaian Sengketa Lingkungan Melalui Gugatan Perdata. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2022.
  6. CNBC Indonesia, “Dirjen Minerba: Negara Rugi Triliunan dari Tambang Ilegal.” www.cnbcindonesia.com, p. 1, 2022.
  7. D. Wahyuhono, S. Purwono, and D. Mutiarin, “Kontrol Pemuda Terhadap Tata Kelola Migas Dan Implikasinya Pada Ketahanan Wilayah Di Kawasan Migas Blok Cepu Kabupaten Bojonegoro,” J. Ketahanan Nas., vol. 25, no. 1, p. 1, 2019, doi: 10.22146/jkn.38265. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jkn.38265
  8. N. & R. S. & Y. A. & R. J. Arsjah, “Sustainability Performance and Sustainable Development Goals,” Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Policy, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–7, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.26.2021.101.1.7
  9. K. D. Cahya, “Teksas Wonocolo di Bojonegoro, Wisata Migas ala Texas AS.” Kompas, Jakarta, 2020.
  10. L. S. Chrisdon Zakaria Purba, Hisar Siregar, “Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Pelaku Usaha Yang Melakukan Usaha Penambangan Tanpa IUP, IPR Atau IUPK (Studi Putusan Nomor 556/Pid.Sus/2019/Pn Bls,” PATIK J. Huk., vol. 10, no. 1, p. 40, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51622/patik.v10i1.220
  11. M. B. Hesti Lestari, “Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Korporasi Dalam Tindak Pidana Lingkungan Hidup Berkaitan Dengan Dumping Limbah Tanpa Izin Pada Perusahaan Tambang PT. Indominco Mandiri Di Kalimantan,” ONSTITUTUM J. Ilm. Huk., vol. 1, no. 1, p. 48, 2022.
  12. F. A. P. Popi Amaria Simatupang, Pricilia Fanesha Pinangkaan, “Upaya Pemerintah Kota Balikpapan Dalam Mengatasi Praktik Pertambangan Batubara Ilegal,” Lex Suprema, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 1051, 2022.
  13. P. Langbroek, K. van den Bos, M. S. Thomas, M. Milo, and W. van Rossum, “Methodology of legal research: Challenges and opportunities,” Utr. Law Rev., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 1–8, 2017, doi: 10.18352/ulr.411. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.411
  14. Peter Mahmud Marzuki, Penelitian Hukum, 13th ed. Jakarta: Kencana, 2017.
  15. M. B. Salinding, “Prinsip Hukum Pertambangan Mineral dan Batubara yang Berpihak kepada Masyarakat Hukum Adat,” J. Konstitusi, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 148, 2019, doi: 10.31078/jk1618. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1618
  16. Mayer Hayrani DS, “Pengaturan Pengawasan Pusat Terhadap Izin Usaha Pertambangan Mineral Dan Batubara Di Era Otonomi Daerah,” J. Legis. Indones., vol. 16, no. 1, p. 133, 2018.
  17. G. N. Nathanael, “Industri Batubara Dari Sisi Ekonomi, Politik, Dan Lingkungan,” Parapolitika J. Polit. Democr. Stud., vol. 2, no. 1, p. 2021, 2021.
  18. Y. Z. Frendly Albertus, “Dampak Dan Pengaruh Pertambangan Batubara Terhadap Masyarakat Dan Lingkungan Di Kalimantan Timur,” LEGALITAS, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 44, 2019.
  19. A. A. Amrurobbi, “Problematika Sampah Visual Media Luar Ruang: Tinjauan Regulasi Kampanye Pemilu dan Pilkada,” J. Adhyasta Pemilu, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 66–78, 2021, doi: 10.55108/jap.v4i2.50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.55108/jap.v4i2.50
  20. and L. H. Hadrian, Endang, Hukum Acara Perdata Di Indonesia: Permasalahan Eksekusi Dan Mediasi, 1st ed. Sleman: Deepublish, 2020.
  21. T. Z. Kamilovska, “Effective Remedy For Excessive Length Of Proceedings: A Macedonian Perspective,” Access to Justice East. Eur., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 62–63, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-4.1-a000046
  22. S. S. Rangkuti, Hukum lingkungan dan kebijaksanaan lingkungan nasional. Surabaya: Airlangga University Press, 2015.
  23. P. P. Pradiatmika, I. A. P. Widiati, and N. M. S. Karma, “Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Masyarakat di Daerah Pertambangan,” J. Analog. Huk., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 252–257, 2020, doi: 10.22225/ah.2.2.1929.252-257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22225/ah.2.2.1929.252-257
  24. Philipus M. Hadjon, Perlindungan Hukum bagi Rakyat di Indonesia. Surabaya: Peradaban, 2007.
  25. H. A. Santoso, “Perspektif Keadilan Hukum Teori Gustav Radbruch Dalam Putusan Pkpu ‘PTB,’” Jatiswara, vol. 36, no. 3, p. 329, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jtsw.v36i3.341
  26. Nuradi, D. A. Budisetyowati, E. Rohaedi, and T. Setiadi, “Analisis Yuridis Penyelesaian Sengketa Lingkungan Hidup Pasca Berlakunya Uu Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 Tentang Cipta Kerja,” Pakuan Law Rev., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 154–169, 2022, doi: 10.33751/palar.v8i1.4689. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33751/palar.v8i1.4689
  27. A. G. Mahardika, “Implikasi Penghapusan Strict Liability Dalam Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja Terhadap Lingkungan Hidup Di Era Sustainable Development Goals,” Leg. J. Huk. dan Perundang-undangan, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 59, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21274/legacy.2022.2.1.58-85
  28. H. Dancer, “Harmony with Nature: towards a new deep legal pluralism,” J. Leg. Plur. Unoff. Law, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–21, 2020, doi: 10.1080/07329113.2020.1845503. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2020.1845503
  29. H. Effendi, M. Mursalin, and R. Sonaji, “Dinamika persetujuan lingkungan dalam perspektif Peraturan Pemerintah nomor 22 tahun 2021 dan peraturan turunannya,” J. Pengelolaan Lingkung. Berkelanjutan (Journal Environ. Sustain. Manag., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 759–787, 2022, doi: 10.36813/jplb.5.3.759-787. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36813/jplb.5.3.759-787
  30. G. P. Larasati, “Penerapan Prinsip Pencemar Membayar Terhadap Pencemaran Limbah Bahan Berbahaya Dan Beracun (B3),” Pacta Sunt Servanda, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 183–193, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23887/jld.v3i2.1611
  31. L. A. N. Kusuma, “Environmental Disputes Without Protection Of Strict Liability Principles : Again , Law On Job Creation,” Law Justice, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 2022, doi: 10.23917/laj.v7i1.699. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23917/laj.v7i1.699
  32. I. Harahap, R. Pratiwi, and Y. Yalid, “Perbandingan Mekanisme Gugatan Kelompok Masyarakat Dan Gugatan Oleh Organisasi Lingkungan Hidup,” J. Karya Ilm. Multidisiplin, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 18–23, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31849/jurkim.v2i1.9049
  33. KBBI, “Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia Online.” KBBI, 2022.
  34. Viswandoro, Kamus Istilah Hukum: Sumber Rujukan Peristilahan Hukum, Cetakan ke. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Medpress Digital, 2014.
  35. F. P. Disantara, “TANGGUNG JAWAB NEGARA DALAM MASA PANDEMI COVID-19,” JCH (Jurnal Cendekia Hukum), vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 48–60, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.33760/jch.v6i1.262. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33760/jch.v6i1.262
  36. M. A. S. Jimly Asshidiqie, Teori Hans Kelsen Tentang Hukum, 1st ed. Jakarta: Konstitusi Press, 2012.
  37. F. A. Samekto, “Menelusuri Akar Pemikiran Hans Kelsen Tentang Stufenbeautheorie Dalam Pendekatan Normatif-Filosofis,” J. Huk. Progresif, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 1, 2019, doi: 10.14710/hp.7.1.1-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/hp.7.1.1-19
  38. Markus Y Hage and P. K. Ningrum, “Corrective Justice And Its Significance On The Private Law,” JILS J. Indones. Leg. Stud., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 339–390, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jils.v7i1.46691
  39. P. N. H. Simanjuntak, Hukum Perdata Indonesia, Cetajkan k. Jakarta: Kencana, 2015.
  40. I. Sari, “Perbuatan Melawan Hukum (PMH) dalam Hukum Pidana dan Hukum Perdata,” J. Ilm. Huk. Dirgant., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 53–70, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.35968/jh.v11i1.651. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35968/jh.v11i1.651
  41. F. N. R. Muhammad Addi Fauzani, “Problematik Penyelesaian Sengketa Perbuatan Melawan Hukum oleh Penguasa Di Peradilan Administrasi Indonesia (Studi Kritis Terhadap Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 2 Tahun 2019),” Widya Pranata Huk., vol. 2, no. 1, p. 23, 2020.
  42. A. Y. Hernoko, Hukum Perjanjian: Asas Proporsionalitas dalam Kontrak Komersial, 4th ed. Jakarta: Kencana, 2014.
  43. N. Astriani, “Pengaturan Air dalam Sistem Hukum Indonesia,” Bina Huk. Lingkung., vol. 5, no. 2, p. 374, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23920/jbmh.v5i2.11
  44. Y. K. Artanto, “Bapongka, Sistem Budaya Suku Bajo dalam Menjaga Kelestarian Sumber Daya Pesisir,” Sabda, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 52–69, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/sabda.v12i1.15253
  45. A. Suntoro, “Implementasi Pencapaian Secara Progresif dalam Omnibus Law Cipta Kerja,” J. HAM, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–18, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.30641/ham.2021.12.1-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30641/ham.2021.12.1-18
  46. S. Bustani, “Budaya Hukum Masyarakat Dalam Mengantisipasi Dampak Kerusakan Lingkungan Hidup Akibat Perkembangan Bioteknologi Pertanian,” Huk. Pidana dan Pembang. Huk., vol. 2, no. 2, p. 10, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25105/hpph.v2i2.9022
  47. M. I. Farma Rahayu, A. F. Susanto, and L. Sukma Muliya, “Gerakan Sosial Pemberdayaan Hukum Dalam Pelestarian Fungsi Lingkungan Hidup Berbasis Kearifan Lokal Melalui Metode Patanjala,” Bina Huk. Lingkung., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 47–56, 2017, doi: 10.24970/jbhl.v2n1.5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24970/jbhl.v2n1.5
  48. A. H. Rachman, “Ketidakpastian Status Lahan dan Potensi Deforestasi Dalam Wacana Pembangunan Bandar Antariksa Biak,” Jentera J. Huk., vol. 4, no. 1, p. 394, 2021.
  49. E. all. Absori, Paradigma Hukum Profetik: Ragam Paradigma Menuju Hukum Berketuhanan, 1st ed. Yogyakarta: CV Genta Fisa Utama, 2018.
  50. S. Mutholingah, “Tasawuf ‘Irfani Dan Implementasinya Dalam Pendidikan Agama Islam,” PIWULANG, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 35, 2020, doi: 10.32478/piwulang.v3i1.503. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32478/piwulang.v3i1.503
  51. A. Farhani and I. S. Chandranegara, “Penguasaan Negara terhadap Pemanfaatan Sumber Daya Alam Ruang Angkasa Menurut Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945,” J. Konstitusi, vol. 16, no. 2, p. 235, 2019, doi: 10.31078/jk1622. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1622
  52. R. Anisa, S. Z. Soraya, and D. U. Nurdahlia, “Konsep Ilmu Sosial Profetik Kuntowijoyo Terhadap Pengembangan Pendidikan Islam,” Kuttab, vol. 05, no. 02, pp. 93–99, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30736/ktb.v5i2.682
  53. A. B. Khudzaifah Dimyati, Haedar Nashir, Elviandri, Absori, Kelik Wardiono, “Indonesia as a legal welfare state: A prophetic-transcendental basis,” Heliyon, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 1–8, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07865
  54. M. Syamsuddin, Ed., Ilmu Hukum Profetik: Gagasan Awal, Landasan Kefilsafatan, dan Kemungkinan Penerapannya di Era Postmodern, 1st ed. Yogyakarta: FH UII Press, 2013.
  55. S. L. Brock, The Light that Binds: A Study in Thomas Aquinas’s Metaphysics of Natural Law. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2020.