The Legal Certainty no Longer Applies to a Nation's Wealth that Has Been Transferred to a State-Owned Enterprise (BUMN)

Abstract

The inclusion of Separated State Wealth within the scope of State Finance remains an interesting issue to study. The law enforcement agency (APH) has a different view when dealing with cases involving separate State Property Managers. The entire entity in which there is Separated State Property is considered to be BUMN. Separate State Properties held at the International Financial Institution are not touched by the APH. This shows the inconsistency and the minimality of understanding of the BOMN. This situation is becoming more complex due to the disharmonization of various regulations relating to Separation State Properties. Article 2 of Act No. 28 of 1999 on the Maintenance of a State Clean and Free from Corruption, Collusion, and Nepotism states that the Directorate is the Organizer of the State. General Explanation of Law No. 31 of 1999 extends the meaning of “Civil Public Officer, that is, the person who receives salary, salary from a corporation that uses the capital/facilities of the state or society. It is difficult for a profit-seeking director to perform his duties properly if he is embedded in the status of State Organizer and PNS as it is in the Ministry/State Authority. The research was conducted using a method of normative jurisprudence, i.e. testing and using secondary data to obtain clarity of the problem. Disharmonization of various regulations and the minimum understanding of APH in dealing with issues of Separated State Property creates legal uncertainty.