JURIDICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT IN MINING LICENSING

Abstract

There remains a gap between legal norms requiring comprehensive oversight and the reality of implementation on the ground, which continues to exhibit various violations, weak coordination, and ineffective law enforcement. Research indicates that the legal analysis of the Central Government's oversight role in mining licensing—under Law Number 3 of 2020 concerning Mineral and Coal Mining—reveals that the centralization of licensing authority in the Central Government is a legal policy aimed at creating legal certainty, simplifying the licensing system, enhancing oversight effectiveness, and achieving more integrated mining governance. Normatively, the Central Government possesses broad authority to grant Business Licenses; conduct guidance, oversight, and evaluation; and impose sanctions on license holders who violate statutory regulations. However, the execution of this oversight function has not been optimal due to the persistence of unauthorized mining, weak supervision of reclamation and post-mining activities, a shortage of Mine Inspectors, suboptimal use of oversight technology, and inadequate coordination between the Central Government, regional governments, and law enforcement agencies. These conditions demonstrate a continuing gap between the expected legal provisions (*das sollen*) and actual implementation (*das sein*). The legal implications of the Central Government's oversight role under Law Number 3 of 2020 extend beyond addressing violations by IUP or IUPK holders; they also encompass the Central Government's responsibility to ensure legal certainty, environmental protection, the optimization of state revenue, and the protection of community rights. License holders who violate licensing provisions may be subject to administrative, civil, or criminal sanctions in accordance with Law Number 3 of 2020, including the provisions of Articles 158 and 161 regarding unauthorized mining and the possession or trading of illegal mining products. Meanwhile, weak oversight carries the potential to cause environmental damage, a loss of state revenue, increased social conflict, and reduced legal certainty in the conduct of mining operations. Therefore, the effectiveness of oversight is a key factor in achieving sustainable mining management that aligns with the mandate of Article 33, Paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.