Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Kartini L Makmur, Andin Aditya Rahman
After a desperate last resort by Churchill Mining Plc—including four different reconsideration applications (peninjauan kembali) from four different companies owned by Churchill Mining Plc,—the licensing case on the mining concessioners in the Kutai Timur regency has finally ended.
In the last resort, the Supreme Court rejected all the reconsideration applications submitted by the Ridlatama Group—consisting of PT Investmine Nusa Persada, PT Ridlatama Trade Powerindo, PT Ridlatama Tambang Mineral, and PT Investama Resources—which is said to be majorly controlled by Churchill Mining Plc.
The applications included, PT Investmine Nusa Persada filing a reconsideration application against East Kutai Regent and PT Nusantara Wahau Coal (Case No. 136 PK/TUN/2012).
In addition, PT Ridlatama Trade Powerindo filed a reconsideration application against East Kutai Regent and PT Nusantara Wahau Coal (Case No. 137 PK/TUN/2012).
Further, PT Ridlatama Tambang Mineral filed a reconsideration application against East Kutai Regent and PT Kaltim Nusantara Coal (Case No. 138 PK/TUN/2012).
Finally, PT Investama Resources filed a reconsideration application against East Kutai Regent and PT Batubara Nusantara Kaltim (case No. No. 139 PK/TUN/2012).
Hotman Paris Hutapea, legal counsel for PT Nusantara Wahau Coal, PT Kaltim Nusantara Coal, and also PT Batubara Nusantara Kaltim, said that this is a phenomenal and signficant case.
“This is the biggest mine in the world. It is said that it may be a treasure chest,” Hotman said in Jakarta on Tuesday.
It is noteworthy that the dispute between East Kutai Regent and Churchill Mining Plc is not only being deliberated in the Indonesian courts, but also at the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).
Churchill Mining Plc brought the dispute to ICSID based on the revocation of its mining license by the East Kutai Regency.
Hotman further commented on the appearance of Nono Makarim, an Indonesian lawyer, during the tail-end proceedings at the ICSID tribunal in Singapore.
“I am concerned that a figure of his caliber [Nono] provided an opinion like he did about foreign interests,” commented Hotman.
During the proceedings at ICSID, Nono stated that the actions taken by the Government of Indonesia in revoking the licenses of the KP Ridlatama Group caused damages to the investors. Nono also condoned the actions of Churchill in executing nominee contracts.
What makes the appearance of Nono interesting is that his statements during the proceedings were very much in contrast to his article that previously appeared in a national newspaper.
Nono’s article, which was published on 1 August 2010, affirmed that the use of nominee contracts by multinational companies to enable business activities within Indonesia clearly violates the law.
Amir Syamsuddin, Minister of Law and Human Rights, also commented on Nono’s appearance at ICSID.
“We have already informed ICSID that the information stated by Mr. Nono contradicts his own writings,” Minister Amir said to Hukumonline in an interview.
The Minister remained optimistic that the difference in opinion between Nono’s statements at the tribunal and his article will be considered by the tribunal because this reflects his integrity as an expert. ehis.
However, Minister Amir added that further strategies will still be carefully constructed.
“We are not worried but we also ascertain that Mr. Nono, of course, may have done what he did in his capacity of acting as a lawyer,” he stated.
At the time of publishing this article, Nono remained unavailable for comment in regard to his appearance in the Churchill case.
(hot/kc)
Kartini L Makmur, Andin Aditya Rahman
After a desperate last resort by Churchill Mining Plc—including four different reconsideration applications (peninjauan kembali) from four different companies owned by Churchill Mining Plc,—the licensing case on the mining concessioners in the Kutai Timur regency has finally ended.
In the last resort, the Supreme Court rejected all the reconsideration applications submitted by the Ridlatama Group—consisting of PT Investmine Nusa Persada, PT Ridlatama Trade Powerindo, PT Ridlatama Tambang Mineral, and PT Investama Resources—which is said to be majorly controlled by Churchill Mining Plc.
The applications included, PT Investmine Nusa Persada filing a reconsideration application against East Kutai Regent and PT Nusantara Wahau Coal (Case No. 136 PK/TUN/2012).
In addition, PT Ridlatama Trade Powerindo filed a reconsideration application against East Kutai Regent and PT Nusantara Wahau Coal (Case No. 137 PK/TUN/2012).
Further, PT Ridlatama Tambang Mineral filed a reconsideration application against East Kutai Regent and PT Kaltim Nusantara Coal (Case No. 138 PK/TUN/2012).
Finally, PT Investama Resources filed a reconsideration application against East Kutai Regent and PT Batubara Nusantara Kaltim (case No. No. 139 PK/TUN/2012).
Hotman Paris Hutapea, legal counsel for PT Nusantara Wahau Coal, PT Kaltim Nusantara Coal, and also PT Batubara Nusantara Kaltim, said that this is a phenomenal and signficant case.
“This is the biggest mine in the world. It is said that it may be a treasure chest,” Hotman said in Jakarta on Tuesday.
It is noteworthy that the dispute between East Kutai Regent and Churchill Mining Plc is not only being deliberated in the Indonesian courts, but also at the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).
Churchill Mining Plc brought the dispute to ICSID based on the revocation of its mining license by the East Kutai Regency.
Hotman further commented on the appearance of Nono Makarim, an Indonesian lawyer, during the tail-end proceedings at the ICSID tribunal in Singapore.
“I am concerned that a figure of his caliber [Nono] provided an opinion like he did about foreign interests,” commented Hotman.
During the proceedings at ICSID, Nono stated that the actions taken by the Government of Indonesia in revoking the licenses of the KP Ridlatama Group caused damages to the investors. Nono also condoned the actions of Churchill in executing nominee contracts.
What makes the appearance of Nono interesting is that his statements during the proceedings were very much in contrast to his article that previously appeared in a national newspaper.
Nono’s article, which was published on 1 August 2010, affirmed that the use of nominee contracts by multinational companies to enable business activities within Indonesia clearly violates the law.
Amir Syamsuddin, Minister of Law and Human Rights, also commented on Nono’s appearance at ICSID.
“We have already informed ICSID that the information stated by Mr. Nono contradicts his own writings,” Minister Amir said to Hukumonline in an interview.
The Minister remained optimistic that the difference in opinion between Nono’s statements at the tribunal and his article will be considered by the tribunal because this reflects his integrity as an expert. ehis.
However, Minister Amir added that further strategies will still be carefully constructed.
“We are not worried but we also ascertain that Mr. Nono, of course, may have done what he did in his capacity of acting as a lawyer,” he stated.
At the time of publishing this article, Nono remained unavailable for comment in regard to his appearance in the Churchill case.
(hot/kc)