TERRITORIAL EXTENT ARTICLES

TERRITORIAL EXTENT ARTICLES

Kewenangan Propinsi Papua Menurut Otsus

Maksud pokok menurut Otsus adalah Propinsi Papua memiliki kewenangan atas semua bidang yang tidak terkait dengan bidang-bidang yang secara khusus tetap dipegang oleh Pemerintah Pusat.

Pasal 4(1) memerinci Kewenangan Daerah Propinsi Papua sebagai berikut:

“Kewenangan Propinsi Papua mencakup kewenangan dalam seluruh bidang pemerintahan, kecuali kewenangan bidang politik luar negeri, pertahanan keamanan, moneter dan fiscal, agama, dan peradilan serta kewenangan tertentu di bidang lain yang ditetapkan sesuai dengan peraturan perundang-undangan.”

Penjelasan selanjutnya menyatakan bahwa beberapa kewenangan di sektor lain sebagaimana dimaksudkan oleh Undang-undang ini adalah kewenangan Pemerintah Pusat yang meliputi:

Kebijakan tentang perencanaan nasional

Pengendalian pembangunan nasional secara makro

Dana perimbangan keuangan

Sistem administrasi negara

Lembaga perekonomian negara

Pembinaan dan pemberdayaan sumber daya manusia

Pendayagunaan sumber daya alam serta teknologi tinggi

Konservasi dan standarisasi nasional

Otsus memberikan kewenangan kepada Papua dalam semua bidang yang tidak ditetapkan dalam Pasal 4(1) dan penjelasannya. Propinsi Papua dapat membuat peraturannya sendiri - Perdasus dan Perdasi – di semua bidang sebagai berikut:

Pertanian

Perikanan dan Laut

Pertambangan dan Energi

Kehutanan

Perusahaan pertanian komersial

Industri dan Perniagaan

Koperasi

Penanaman Modal

Tenaga Kerja

Kesehatan

Pendidikan

Budaya

Layanan Sosial

Penataan Ruang (Perencanaan)

Permukiman dan Kependudukan

Komunikasi

Lingkungan Hidup

Politik dan Administrasi Pemerintahan Setempat

Pariwisata

Therefore Undang-undang enacted by the DPRRI and the Central Government in these areas listed above should not be valid and effective in Papua Province. It would appear that the DPRRI and the Central Government do not understand this.

Undang-undang tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional

This problem concerning the application of Undang-undang to Papua Province has emerged in the context of the recent Undang-undang tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional.

Pasal 56 of Otsus concerns education and states:

(1) Pemerintah Provinsi bertanggung jawab terhadap penyelenggaraan pendidikan pada semua jenjang, jalur, dan jenis pendidikan di Provinsi Papua.

(2) Pemerintah menetapkan kebijakan umum tentang otonomi perguruan tinggi, kurikulum inti, dan standar mutu pada semua jenjang, jalur, dan jenis pendidikan sebagai pedoman pelaksanaan bagi pimpinan perguruan tinggi dan Pemerintah Provinsi.

Therefore education is an autonomous competence for Papua Province except that the Central Government shall stipulate the general policy for University-level education and the core curriculum and quality standards at all levels of education. The normal technique of statutory interpretation is to interpret the general principle in ayat (1) widely and the exceptions to that general principle, in ayat (2), narrowly. Consequently the DPRRI and the Central Government can only stipulate some broad principles concerning Universities, the core curriculum and quality standards. They should not enact detailed regulations concerning education in Papua Province.

Therefore the new Undang-undang tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional should not apply in Papua Province, except for any particular Articles which concern the general policy for higher education, the core curriculum or quality standards. This Undang-undang has been rejected by the DPRD because it is not supported in Papua but it should actually be rejected on the principle that education is an autonomous competence according to Otsus. Undang-undang which cover autonomous areas of competence should not apply in Papua Province irrespective of whether their contents are popular or not. As a matter of constitutional principle and state law the DPRRI should not legislate for Papua Province in autonomous areas of competence.

Territorial Extent Articles

Undang-undang which entirely concern sectors which are autonomous competences in Papua should contain an Article simply stating:

“Undang-undang ini tidak berlaku di Provinsi Papua.”

An Article such as this is known as a ‘Territorial Extent Article’ because it describes the geographical area in which that Undang-undang is effective.

Territorial Extent Articles could provide a simple solution to the problem of the DPRRI continuing to legislate in areas which are within Papua’s competence under Otsus. Such clauses should be included in every Undang-undang enacted by the DPRRI in the post-Otsus era.

The concept of the Territorial Extent Article is not new in Indonesia. Undang-undang No. 22/1999 tentang Pemerintah Daerah contains a Territorial Extent Article. Pasal 117 dari UU No. 22/99 states:

“Ibukota Negara Republik Indonesia, Jakarta, karena kedudukannya diatur tersendiri dengan undang-undang.”

By means of Pasal 117, UU No. 22/1999, in its entirety, does not apply to Jakarta. Consequently, if Territorial Extent Articles can be used to exclude Jakarta from particular Undang-undang, there is no reason why they cannot also be used to exclude Papua from particular Undang-undang.

Other types of Territorial Extent Articles can be used in different circumstances. For example the DPRRI will shortly consider the Rancangan Undang-undang concerning the proposed new Constitutional Court. According to Pasal 4 of Otsus the sector of peradilan [judicature] is retained by Jakarta and therefore this Undang-undang will apply to Papua Province as to the rest of Indonesia. For the avoidance of doubt this Undang-undang should include an Article as follows:

“Undang-undang ini berlaku di Provinsi Papua”

There may be situations where an Undang-undang contains a mixture of Articles. Some Articles will apply in Papua Province (because they are competences retained by Jakarta under Otsus) and some Articles will not apply in Papua (because they are autonomous competences under Otsus). In these situations the Territorial Extent Article should simply specify which particular Articles apply and which do not. For example:

“Only Articles 35 and 36 of this Undang-undang apply in Papua Province. All the other Articles in this Undang-undang do not apply in Papua Province.”

Atau

“This Undang-undang applies in Papua Province except for Articles 23, 24, 25 and 47.”

There may be situations where a particular Article in an Undang-undang applies only in Papua Province and not to other Provinces in Indonesia. For example:

“Pasal 62 of this Undang-undang applies only in Papua Province.”

A variety of formulations can be used. What is important is that the Territorial Extent Article clearly explains which Articles of the Undang-undang apply to Papua and which Articles do not.

Concluding comments

The basic point is that for every subject that the DPRRI is legislating on it should consider the position for Papua Province and whether the subject is a competence retained by the Central Government or a competence in which Papua now has autonomy.

The problem lies with Government Departments when drafting Undang-undang and then with the DPRRI which debates these drafts. The Central Government and the DPRRI think that Otsus was simply an Undang-undang which they have already enacted and now they can essentially ignore it. It is this attitude, and also the basic lack of knowledge about Otsus in Jakarta, which is causing these problems. Autonomy is a process - not an event. It is not a single act but an ongoing system of governance for Indonesia. Otsus in Papua Province should always be considered when the Central Government and the DPRRI are drafting and discussing Undang-undang in other sectors.

Efforts should be made to persuade Central Government Departments and the DPRRI to automatically include a Territorial Extent Article in every Rancangan Undang-undang. Perhaps the members of the DPRRI from Papua could socialise this idea with their colleagues?

Laurence Sullivan

UNCEN

Jayapura

June 2003