Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
2026 Hak Cipta Milik Hukumonline.com
Produk Pilihan
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami
Marcell Sihombing, Fathan Qorib
The mandatory use of the rupiah for every transaction made in Indonesian is generating some negative reactions from many parties. A week ago, a seaport company questioned this requirement provided forunder Bank Indonesia (BI) Regulation No. 17/3/PBI/2015 on Mandatory Use of Rupiah Currency in Indonesian Territory (Regulation), asinconsistent with other government policy.
Academics have also commented on this issue from different angles. Hikmahanto Juwana, a professor of international law at Universitas Indonesia, believes that the sanctions for violations are too severe. According to Prof. Juwana, the criminal sanctions under the Currency Law—the legislation which mandates the issueof the Regulation—makes it too easy for people to be thrown to jail, if not accompanied with proper law enforcement.
“We can’t let the intention to strengthen Rupiah’s position end up crowding prisons,” Mr. Juwana said during a discussion held by hukumonline last Thursday.
As an example, the Currency Law providesthat aperson who is not using rupiah for transactions made in Indonesia will be subject to one year imprisonment (maximum) or a fine of up to IDR 200 million..
Mr. Juwana emphasized that the Curreny Law disregardsthe intention of the person making a transaction. For instance, when tourists have just arrived in Indonesia and are yet to exchange their money into Rupiah, as matters currently stand under a strict literal interpretation that tourist may be prosecuted undert he Currency Law and the Regulation, even though they have no criminal intention in doing the transaction.
Nevertheless, Mr. Juwana said that there is an obligation on all citizens to obey the rule. While the Regulation was intended to strengthen Rupiah, this intention needs to be supported with public faith that the Rupiah and Indonesia’s economy are strong.
“This is not an entirely legal matter since it also involves economical sectors. If the policy requires the use of Rupiah but the fundamental economy lacks behind, this will be burdensome,” Mr. Juwana explained.
Additionally, Mr. Juwana said that if the public and business sector are burdened by this policy, they may file a judicial review petition to challenge the provisions witht he relevant judicial institutions—the Currency Law at the Constitutional Court, and the Regulation at the Supreme Court.
Prinuka Arrom, representing the Legal Bureau of the Attorney General’sOffice (AGO), added that there is yet to be a single case handled by his institution regarding aviolation of the Currency Law and the Regulation. He also underlined that the AGO and BI are yet to enter cooperation on this matter.
“Since we are yet to establish cooperation, we [the AGO] will refer to KUHAP. This is standard procedure for the AGO, we wait for the police investigator to submit reports regarding violations,” said Mr. Arrom.
Explaining the Regulation further, Hernowo Koentoadji, Deputy Director to the Currency Management Department at BI, declared that Article 12 of the Regulation authorizes BI to request information regarding the implementation of Mandatory Use of Rupiah. This covers transactions as well as quotation for goods and services within Indonesian territory from the parties involved, for which the requested parties must provide information.
“The PBI also regulates reporting and supervision of compliance by BI. Obviously BI can’t cover all layers of society, so detailed procedures will be regulated by a Circular Letter,” said Mr. Koentoadji.
(hot/kc)
The mandatory use of the rupiah for every transaction made in Indonesian is generating some negative reactions from many parties. A week ago, a seaport company questioned this requirement provided forunder Bank Indonesia (BI) Regulation No. 17/3/PBI/2015 on Mandatory Use of Rupiah Currency in Indonesian Territory (Regulation), asinconsistent with other government policy.Academics have also commented on this issue from different angles. Hikmahanto Juwana, a professor of international law at Universitas Indonesia, believes that the sanctions for violations are too severe. According to Prof. Juwana, the criminal sanctions under the Currency Law—the legislation which mandates the issueof the Regulation—makes it too easy for people to be thrown to jail, if not accompanied with proper law enforcement.
“We can’t let the intention to strengthen Rupiah’s position end up crowding prisons,” Mr. Juwana said during a discussion held by hukumonline last Thursday.
As an example, the Currency Law providesthat aperson who is not using rupiah for transactions made in Indonesia will be subject to one year imprisonment (maximum) or a fine of up to IDR 200 million..
Mr. Juwana emphasized that the Curreny Law disregardsthe intention of the person making a transaction. For instance, when tourists have just arrived in Indonesia and are yet to exchange their money into Rupiah, as matters currently stand under a strict literal interpretation that tourist may be prosecuted undert he Currency Law and the Regulation, even though they have no criminal intention in doing the transaction.
Nevertheless, Mr. Juwana said that there is an obligation on all citizens to obey the rule. While the Regulation was intended to strengthen Rupiah, this intention needs to be supported with public faith that the Rupiah and Indonesia’s economy are strong.
“This is not an entirely legal matter since it also involves economical sectors. If the policy requires the use of Rupiah but the fundamental economy lacks behind, this will be burdensome,” Mr. Juwana explained.
Additionally, Mr. Juwana said that if the public and business sector are burdened by this policy, they may file a judicial review petition to challenge the provisions witht he relevant judicial institutions—the Currency Law at the Constitutional Court, and the Regulation at the Supreme Court.
Prinuka Arrom, representing the Legal Bureau of the Attorney General’sOffice (AGO), added that there is yet to be a single case handled by his institution regarding aviolation of the Currency Law and the Regulation. He also underlined that the AGO and BI are yet to enter cooperation on this matter.
“Since we are yet to establish cooperation, we [the AGO] will refer to KUHAP. This is standard procedure for the AGO, we wait for the police investigator to submit reports regarding violations,” said Mr. Arrom.
Explaining the Regulation further, Hernowo Koentoadji, Deputy Director to the Currency Management Department at BI, declared that Article 12 of the Regulation authorizes BI to request information regarding the implementation of Mandatory Use of Rupiah. This covers transactions as well as quotation for goods and services within Indonesian territory from the parties involved, for which the requested parties must provide information.
“The PBI also regulates reporting and supervision of compliance by BI. Obviously BI can’t cover all layers of society, so detailed procedures will be regulated by a Circular Letter,” said Mr. Koentoadji.
(hot/kc)
Marcell Sihombing, Fathan Qorib
The mandatory use of the rupiah for every transaction made in Indonesian is generating some negative reactions from many parties. A week ago, a seaport company questioned this requirement provided forunder Bank Indonesia (BI) Regulation No. 17/3/PBI/2015 on Mandatory Use of Rupiah Currency in Indonesian Territory (Regulation), asinconsistent with other government policy.
Academics have also commented on this issue from different angles. Hikmahanto Juwana, a professor of international law at Universitas Indonesia, believes that the sanctions for violations are too severe. According to Prof. Juwana, the criminal sanctions under the Currency Law—the legislation which mandates the issueof the Regulation—makes it too easy for people to be thrown to jail, if not accompanied with proper law enforcement.
“We can’t let the intention to strengthen Rupiah’s position end up crowding prisons,” Mr. Juwana said during a discussion held by hukumonline last Thursday.
As an example, the Currency Law providesthat aperson who is not using rupiah for transactions made in Indonesia will be subject to one year imprisonment (maximum) or a fine of up to IDR 200 million..
Mr. Juwana emphasized that the Curreny Law disregardsthe intention of the person making a transaction. For instance, when tourists have just arrived in Indonesia and are yet to exchange their money into Rupiah, as matters currently stand under a strict literal interpretation that tourist may be prosecuted undert he Currency Law and the Regulation, even though they have no criminal intention in doing the transaction.
Nevertheless, Mr. Juwana said that there is an obligation on all citizens to obey the rule. While the Regulation was intended to strengthen Rupiah, this intention needs to be supported with public faith that the Rupiah and Indonesia’s economy are strong.
“This is not an entirely legal matter since it also involves economical sectors. If the policy requires the use of Rupiah but the fundamental economy lacks behind, this will be burdensome,” Mr. Juwana explained.
Additionally, Mr. Juwana said that if the public and business sector are burdened by this policy, they may file a judicial review petition to challenge the provisions witht he relevant judicial institutions—the Currency Law at the Constitutional Court, and the Regulation at the Supreme Court.
Prinuka Arrom, representing the Legal Bureau of the Attorney General’sOffice (AGO), added that there is yet to be a single case handled by his institution regarding aviolation of the Currency Law and the Regulation. He also underlined that the AGO and BI are yet to enter cooperation on this matter.
“Since we are yet to establish cooperation, we [the AGO] will refer to KUHAP. This is standard procedure for the AGO, we wait for the police investigator to submit reports regarding violations,” said Mr. Arrom.
Explaining the Regulation further, Hernowo Koentoadji, Deputy Director to the Currency Management Department at BI, declared that Article 12 of the Regulation authorizes BI to request information regarding the implementation of Mandatory Use of Rupiah. This covers transactions as well as quotation for goods and services within Indonesian territory from the parties involved, for which the requested parties must provide information.
“The PBI also regulates reporting and supervision of compliance by BI. Obviously BI can’t cover all layers of society, so detailed procedures will be regulated by a Circular Letter,” said Mr. Koentoadji.
(hot/kc)
The mandatory use of the rupiah for every transaction made in Indonesian is generating some negative reactions from many parties. A week ago, a seaport company questioned this requirement provided forunder Bank Indonesia (BI) Regulation No. 17/3/PBI/2015 on Mandatory Use of Rupiah Currency in Indonesian Territory (Regulation), asinconsistent with other government policy.Academics have also commented on this issue from different angles. Hikmahanto Juwana, a professor of international law at Universitas Indonesia, believes that the sanctions for violations are too severe. According to Prof. Juwana, the criminal sanctions under the Currency Law—the legislation which mandates the issueof the Regulation—makes it too easy for people to be thrown to jail, if not accompanied with proper law enforcement.
“We can’t let the intention to strengthen Rupiah’s position end up crowding prisons,” Mr. Juwana said during a discussion held by hukumonline last Thursday.
As an example, the Currency Law providesthat aperson who is not using rupiah for transactions made in Indonesia will be subject to one year imprisonment (maximum) or a fine of up to IDR 200 million..
Mr. Juwana emphasized that the Curreny Law disregardsthe intention of the person making a transaction. For instance, when tourists have just arrived in Indonesia and are yet to exchange their money into Rupiah, as matters currently stand under a strict literal interpretation that tourist may be prosecuted undert he Currency Law and the Regulation, even though they have no criminal intention in doing the transaction.
Nevertheless, Mr. Juwana said that there is an obligation on all citizens to obey the rule. While the Regulation was intended to strengthen Rupiah, this intention needs to be supported with public faith that the Rupiah and Indonesia’s economy are strong.
“This is not an entirely legal matter since it also involves economical sectors. If the policy requires the use of Rupiah but the fundamental economy lacks behind, this will be burdensome,” Mr. Juwana explained.
Additionally, Mr. Juwana said that if the public and business sector are burdened by this policy, they may file a judicial review petition to challenge the provisions witht he relevant judicial institutions—the Currency Law at the Constitutional Court, and the Regulation at the Supreme Court.
Prinuka Arrom, representing the Legal Bureau of the Attorney General’sOffice (AGO), added that there is yet to be a single case handled by his institution regarding aviolation of the Currency Law and the Regulation. He also underlined that the AGO and BI are yet to enter cooperation on this matter.
“Since we are yet to establish cooperation, we [the AGO] will refer to KUHAP. This is standard procedure for the AGO, we wait for the police investigator to submit reports regarding violations,” said Mr. Arrom.
Explaining the Regulation further, Hernowo Koentoadji, Deputy Director to the Currency Management Department at BI, declared that Article 12 of the Regulation authorizes BI to request information regarding the implementation of Mandatory Use of Rupiah. This covers transactions as well as quotation for goods and services within Indonesian territory from the parties involved, for which the requested parties must provide information.
“The PBI also regulates reporting and supervision of compliance by BI. Obviously BI can’t cover all layers of society, so detailed procedures will be regulated by a Circular Letter,” said Mr. Koentoadji.
(hot/kc)