The Juridical Impact of the Implementation of the Paradigm Regarding the Determination of the National Capital (IKN) of the Archipelago as an Asymmetric Region
Abstract
The relocation of the National Capital (IKN) of the archipelago to Kalimantan reaped pros and cons from the community. However, as a democratic country, when the State has decided to move the National Capital (IKN) of the archipelago with a democratic process through law, all components of the nation should support it. The Indonesian nation needs to minimize the excesses of moving the National Capital (IKN) of the Archipelago. There is no single decision that satisfies all people, but decisions that provide greater benefits to the Indonesian nation must be supported as a form of love and devotion for the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945. The results showed that and obstacles in determining the National Capital (IKN) of the archipelago as an asymmetric area as described in the discussion were imbalance, injustice, regional conflicts, coordination and integration, resource management, inadequate infrastructure, availability of public services, uneven economic development, lack of investment and private sector development, complex interagency coordination, and social and cultural change. And there is no concrete case study regarding the implementation of the National Capital (IKN) of the archipelago as an asymmetric area because this plan is still in the planning and discussion stage.
Downloads
References
Bahar, Ujang. (2007). Wewenang Pemerintah Daerah terhadap Pinjaman yang Sumber Dananya Berasal dari Luar Negeri, Jurnal Hukum Bisnis, 26 (4), 26.
Budiardjo, Miriam. (2007). Dasar-Dsar Ilmu Politik. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama. hlm. 16.
Dunn, Willian N. (2003). Pengantar Analisis Kebijakan Publik, in Edisi Kedua. Yogyakarta: UGM Press. hlm. 214–216.
Hadiz, Vedi. (2004). Decentralization and Democrazy in Indonesia: A Critique of Neo-Institutionalist Perspectives, Development and Change, 25(4), 697
Humas MKRI. (2022). Daerah Otonomi Khusus Boleh Bersifat Desentralisasi Asimetris. Available online form: MKRI
Ibid, hlm. 623
Ibid, hlm. 628.
Ibid, hlm. 323.
Kaho, Joseph Riwu. (2012). Analilsis Hubungan Pemerintah Pusat dan Daerah di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Polgov JPP Fisipol UGM. hlm. 15
Lambelanova, Rossy. (2022). Paradigma Baru Desentralisasi Asimetris Di Indonesia. Jatinangor: Buku Litarutur IPDN 2022. hlm. 2
Lambelanova. Op.Cit., hlm. 322.
Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. (2012). Pengantar Ilmu Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada. hlm. 18.
Monoarfa, Suharso. (2020). Naskah Akademik Rancangan Akademik Ibu Kota Negara. Jakarta: Kementrian PPN/Bappenas. hlm. 27.
Mutaqin, Dadang Jainal. (2021). Analisis Konsep Forest City dalam Rencana Pembangunan Ibu Kota Negara, Bappenas Working Papers, 4(1), 14.
Nugroho, Riant. (2009). Public Policy. Jakarta: Elex Media Komputindo, hlm. 83.
Nurdin, M. Rizki. (2022) “Desentralisasi Dan Kekhususan Pelaksanaan Otonomi Daerah Otorita Ibu Kota Nusantara”, Lex Renaissance, 7(3), 621.
Purnama, Suryadi Jaya. (2022). Analisis Kebijakan Publik Pemindahan Ibu Kota Negara (Analysis Of The National Capital Relocation Policy), Jurnal Ekonomi & Kebijakan Publik, 13(2), 153.
Soemitro, Ronny Hanitijo. (2010). Dualisme Penelitian Hukum (Normatif dan Empiris). Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar. hlm. 91.
Sukirno,Dwi Kuncahyo. (2015). Penerapan Desentralisasi Asimetris dalam Penyelenggaraan Urusan Keistimewaan DIY sebagai Basis Otonomi bagi Terwujudnya Kesejahteraan Rakyat,Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum,10(1), 131.
Thomas, R. Dye. (1987). Understanding Public Policy. New Yersey: Engelewood Chief, hlm.3.
