GR Cost Recovery Against The Law

JAKARTA: Despite the government  having prepared the implementing regulation on   Government Regulation No.79/2010 regarding cost recovery, the GR is still unworkable because it is  fundamentally contrary to the  prevailing law. The Indonesian Petroleum Association (IPA) Attorney Todung Mulya Lubis said that  basically  there should be no rules which conflict with its higher regulations.

He said that even though there is an implementing regulation for the  afore mentioned GR,  there  will be no  significant  improvement as the GR itself has deviated from its higher regulations.
"GR 79 contradicts several superior laws and regulations such as the Oil and Gas Law, the Income Tax Act Law, Civil Code and Law No.10/2004 on the Formation of Laws and Regulations," he said today.
 
 Mulya said that  following detailed analysis and due to the above-mentioned reasons, the IPA then filed a judicial review on GR No.79/2010 on Recoverable Operating Costs and Income Tax Treatment in the Upstream Oil and Gas Business Sector.
For the sake of consistency of the legislation, the judicial review had to be instigated and  following due consideration became the only  course of action that was available to the IPA. "We  have already  filed   the petition to the Supreme Court on June 16, 2011. There are 22 items [in 20 articles]  that we request the Supreme Court to review and the process will now commence, potentially lasting for two months, but it could be as long as 6 months", he said.
 
 According to him, the IPA will definitely  be  faced  at a later stage with a process in which the government has the right to respond to this judicial review. If the government can  recognize  the urgency and impact of this GR and immediately respond, the Supreme Court can give  a  priority to proceed with the paperwork.
 
Relating to  the GR,  the  IPA asks  that the  Supreme Court review in particular Article 38b that reads that items that are not yet regulated or not regulated strictly enough in the PSC such as the amount of state revenues, unrecoverable operating costs and six other items  should be adjusted in this GR within a maximum period of 3 months. 
According  to  Todung, in  Article 38a , the government  does indeed recognize the sanctity of  existing contracts.  However, Article 38b requires adjustment as the content of this Article could negate the  fundamental principals  of  article  38a and the sanctity of the contract itself.   He added, "The contract can be changed , but any amendment of  the contract is possible only  following  the  mutual consent of both parties. Article 38b will change the terms of the PSC," he said.
 
 The Vice President of  the  IPA ,  Sammy Hamzah ,  said that  the IPA  continues  to communicate with the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources and BPMIGAS  on a regular basis  to seek out  a mutually agreeable solution  to  this problem.   But he also understands that the Ministry of Energy cannot decide this by themselves as the GR on Cost recovery is also associated with oil and gas revenues which is the responsibility of the Ministry of Finance.
 
 "We understand that determining and clarifying  the GR is not just  a responsibility of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, but also  comes under  the authority of   the Ministry of Finance because it is closely related to fiscal  issues and  government budgets .  It is therefore that this  issue  is still in discussion amongst  the respective government agencies," he said.
 
The IPA previously forecast  that  the implementation of GR No.79/2010 on cost recovery could reduce investments in  the  oil and gas sector by 20% and could  result in a decrease in  oil and gas production  of  150,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day (BOEPD). (MMH)

Share this Post:
Posted by Administrator