PT RUBS's Allegations Are Considered Salah Besar, PT BME Affirms In Healthy Conditions And Has No Debt

Illustration. (Photo: Doc. Antara)

JAKARTA - The accusation by PT Rantau Utama Bhakti Sumatra (RUBS) which assesses PT Bumi Marapi Energi (BME) does not want to pay off debts is considered untrue. This was revealed by PT BME's attorney, Agung Faturrahman from Virangga & Partners Law Firm.

"The accusation of PT RUBS is unclear, which in the end makes the company (PT BME) feel disadvantaged, investors also feel uncomfortable. Even though BME is a company that is in good health and has no debt. What is accused (PT RUBS) can be subject to Articles 310 and 311 of the Criminal Code regarding defamation," said Agung Faturrahman, to VOI, Tuesday, January 23.

Agung said that previously the Commercial Court at the Central Jakarta District Court had rejected the PKPU application submitted by PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti against PT Bumi Merapi Energi which was registered in case No. 344/Pdt-PKPU/2023/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst Rejection of the PKPU application has been read out by the Panel of Judges in the agenda of the trial for reading the verdict on December 11, 2023.

For information, Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations or better known as PKPU is a process of completing debtors' debts to be able to offer debt settlement offers to their creditors, the estuary of the PKPU itself is peace as mandated by Law Number: 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations.

"With the failure of the terms referred to in submitting the PKPU application, PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti's PKPU application was rejected. That way, PT Bumi Merapi Energi won this case," said PT Bumi Merapi Energi's attorney Agung Faturrahman from Virangga & Partners Law Firm in his official statement, Tuesday, December 12.

The decision, according to Agung Faturrahman, states that PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti cannot simply prove the bill submitted against PT Bumi Merapi Energi.

Where it turns out that PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti still has an obligation to PT Bumi Merapi EnergiI which has not been completed in accordance with the agreement that was previously agreed upon, so that the bill argued by PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti becomes not simple and reasoned according to the law of the PKPU application to be rejected.

The PKPU application submitted by PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti was not the first to be submitted, previously PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti had submitted a PKPU Application in July 2023 which was later revoked for no apparent reason in August 2023 and PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti again submitted a PKPU application in October 2023 for the second time. This is considered a bad intention from the PKPU Petitioner who has abused the PKPU process itself.

In the decision read out by the Panel of Judges, there were at least four reasons that made the basis for the PKPU application from PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti rejected.

First, PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti still has obligations that have not been completed under the agreement. Among them, there is disagreement between monthly progress claim in July and August 2021.

Thus, between PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti and PT Bumi Merapi Energi, there is still a dispute that must first be resolved through a General Court examination and cannot be proven through the Commercial Court.

This is because, in the Commercial Court based on Article 8 Paragraph (4) of the Bankruptcy Law and PKPU, it is emphasized that the existence of bills must be proven simply. Thus, the PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti bill cannot be proven simply.

Second, in the PKPU application, PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti has withdrawn one other creditor, namely PT Rantau Utama Bhakti Sumatra, whose bill submitted against PT Bumi Merapi Energi also still has disputes over margin rights and excess down payment, so that the PT Rantau Utama Bhakti Sumatra bill still has disputes and cannot be proven simply.

In addition, PT Bumi Merapi Energi's debt to PT Rantau Utama Bhakti Sumatra still contains disputes that need further proof. Thus, the proof of the PTbRantau Utama Bakti Sumatra bill is not simple.

Third, PT Bumi Merapi Energi has implemented tax payments in a obedient manner to the State of around Rp. 134 billion. This fact proves that PT Bumi Merapi Energi has credibility in carrying out its obligations to the State.

In addition, PT Bumi Merapi Energi shows that PT Bumi Merapi Energi is a healthy company and is still able to pay off debts when compared to the value of bills submitted by PT Tambang Rantau Utama Bhakti.

Fourth, based on the principle of justice in bankruptcy, it must be fulfilled by parties, including creditors and debtors, so that if creditors apply for PKPU without regard for other creditors, it will be detrimental and have a negative impact on many parties including investors and employees.

The facts presented by the Panel of Judges in the Decision also fended off all reports through online media that were not true about PT Bumi Merapi Energi, where the news that had been widely circulated was conveyed by irresponsible persons and had a negative impact on public trust in PT Bumi Merapi Energi as a Mining Company that had contributed well to the State.

Based on the Bankruptcy Law and the Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations, to be granted the PKPU application, there are at least 2 creditors, one of which is a debt that has matured and can be collected and the debt can be proven simply.

*****

Editor's Note

This article is the right to PT BME's responsibility for VOI's report entitled 'No Pay Debt', PT Bumi Merapi Energi Is Sued for Bankruptcy at the Central Jakarta District Court. The strengthening of this right to responsibility is also part of VOI's media responsibility in accordance with the Guidelines for Cyber Media News and the provisions of the Press Law.