Client Alert 26 March 2015



Constitutional Court leaves Water Sector High and Dry

1. Introduction

In what will be seen by many as yet another controversial decision in the economic sphere, the Constitutional Court has unanimously decided that the 2004 Water Resources Law[i] is non-binding as being contrary to the 1945 Constitution, and in doing so reinstated its predecessor, the 1974 Water Law.[ii] This latest decision[iii] (the “Decision”), handed down on 18 February 2015, reaffirms the Court’s literal interpretation of the constitutional provisions on state ownership of natural resources, and in doing so thwarts the nation’s efforts to modernize the management of water resources, including public access to piped water and sanitation services. At the same time, it throws the entire water sector into chaos at a time when Indonesia urgently needs to maintain, or increase, current foreign direct investment (FDI) flows. Several planned projects are reported to have been postponed and the rights of existing water-utilization license holders are now in limbo.

2. Background

2.1. Urban Water Supply & Sanitation Schemes

Indonesia has one of the least developed urban water supply and sanitation systems in Asia. Even in the capital and its satellite cities, the vast majority of residents lack access to public sewage systems, and instead are forced to rely on (often leaky) septic tanks. Since independence, the public sector has proven itself unable to serve the water and sanitation needs of the country’s burgeoning population.

Given the financial, technical and other constraints (including corruption) facing the public sector, the Water Resources Law envisaged the involvement of the private sector in the provision of public water and sanitation schemes based on the principle of full-cost recovery for those who can afford to pay. The Petitioners argued that this was contrary to the principle of state control over natural resources, as enshrined in the Constitution.

2.2. Packaged Water Companies

Another source of controversy in recent years has been allegations of abuses and over-exploitation of water resources by packaged water companies, who are often accused of monopolizing such resources in rural areas. As is often the case in developing countries, where resource nationalism has in general been on the rise, the bulk of the scrutiny in Indonesia has been directed at the foreign-owned sector. Once again, the Petitioners argued that the activities of packaged water producers violated the spirit of state control over natural resources.

While much of the public controversy over water in recent years has focused on corporatization and the operations of packaged water producers, the reality is that the impact of the judgment will affect all sectors that require large volumes of water in their production cycles, including the food & beverage, textile and hospitality industries, to name a few.

3. The Decision

The Court based its reasoning on Article 33(3) of the Indonesian Constitution, which may be freely translated as follows:

The land and the waters and all the natural resources contained therein shall be controlled by the State and employed so as to provide maximum benefit to the people.[iv]

In doing so, it relied on two of its previous decisions on the Water Resources Law, one in 2004 and one in 2005,[v] when it held that the legislation would only be constitutional if six conditions prescribed by the Court were fulfilled by the government. In other words, if these conditions were not fulfilled, the legislation would be open to further challenge.

The said conditions are as follows:

  1. Every measure related to water utilization must have regard to the public’s rights to water, as the resource is to be utilized for the greater good of the people;
  2. The state must ensure the fulfillment of the public’s rights to water;
  3. The utilization of water must take into account environmental conservation;
  4. The state must possess the authority to oversee and control water;
  5. The state must grant priority to state or local government enterprises in the utilization of water; and
  6. If conditions 1 – 5 are satisfied and water is still available, the private sector may be granted rights to utilize water, but only subject to strict conditions.

The Court found that a series of regulations issued by the government since the handing down of the 2004 and 2005 decisions failed to satisfy the above conditions and that accordingly the Water Resources Law must be found unconstitutional.

As regards the scope of “state control” under Article 33(3) of the Constitution, the Court has consistently interpreted the term as signifying nothing less than direct control. It has used this interpretation to strike down a raft of laws in recent years, such as the 2002 Electricity Law and the legislation establishing the former upstream oil and gas regulator BP Migas, insisting that natural resources must continue to be controlled directly by the state or state/local government companies.

5. Implications

The Constitutional Court’s decision on the Water Resources Law strikes at the heart of the government’s efforts to modernize the water sector. It means that the public-private partnership (PPP) approach that has been pursued by the government so as to expand mains water and sanitation networks is now in peril. The Court appears to essentially dislike the concept of cost recovery and wishes to see water and sanitation services provided by state/local government bodies on a non-profit basis, something that would make existing PPP initiatives unsustainable. Unfortunately, the Court offered no alternative to the current to the PPP approach, and it appears to be unconcerned about the poor record of state/local government bodies in providing such services in the past. Indonesia needs enormous investment in the water and sanitation sectors in order to even begin to address current deficiencies. The government simply does not have the money, so where is it to come from? No answers were forthcoming from the Court.

It has been argued that the Decision can be used to overturn existing water-utilization licenses of private sector firms. However, we do not believe that this argument is well-founded. The reality is that the Constitutional Court Law provides that decisions of the Court on the constitutionality of legislation are not of retroactive effect. Therefore, all decisions or determinations made on the basis of a statute prior to its annulment for unconstitutionality remain in effect. Accordingly, all licenses issued based on the Water Resources Law should also remain in effect. However, the situation as regards renewals of existing licenses remains unclear. Disgruntled members of the public could also use the Decision as a tool to challenge licenses. While we believe that such challenges should not succeed, it will ultimately be for the courts to decide. It is also a cause of concern that the Investment Coordinating Board (BKPM) quickly put on hold all applications for new FDI licenses in the water sector and also the processing of approvals for commercial actions by companies that rely on water as part of their business cycles.

The Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing announced late last Thursday (Mar 19) that it would send out a circular letter to interested parties stating that all existing joint venture / collaboration agreements and licenses with the private sector (issued under the Water Resources Law) will continue in effect until such time as their expiry. The ministry said that in making this decision, it had taken into account the advice of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights. However, there has been no guidance forthcoming on what steps will be taken by Government to provide a permanent solution to the problems caused by the Decision.  
Meanwhile, it has been reported in the media that the Central Jakarta District Court ruled on Tuesday (March 26) that the partial privatization of water services in Jakarta is illegal. However, no further details of the precise scope and grounds of the judgment have been forthcoming, including as regards the crucial question of whether it was influenced by the Decision..

6. What Now?

The answer to the “what now?” question is unclear. The 1974 legislation is clearly unsatisfactory as it fails to expressly regulate many important aspects of the water and sanitation sectors. It was also enacted prior to the era of regional autonomy. Consequently, new legislation will ultimately be required. To go through the normal legislative process would take a considerable period of time and leave something of a legal vacuum until enacted. Accordingly, the best solution would seem to be for the Government to issue an Emergency Regulation,[vi] which would enjoy the force of law until such time as it is approved or rejected by the House of Representatives (DPR), as the case may be. This would allow the Government some breathing space to draft comprehensive new legislation, hopefully having first carefully scrutinized the provisions of the Water Resources Law that the Constitutional Court found objectionable, and replacing them with something more amenable to the Court’s way of thinking, while at the same time maintaining the spirit and ethos of the original legislation.

Another alternative would be for the Government to issue a Government Regulation or a Presidential Decree to maintain the status quo until such time as new legislation can be enacted by the House of Representatives (DPR) However, as things stand at the moment, there has been a singular lack of guidance from the executive, which has led to significant legal uncertainty in the water and sanitation sectors.

7. Conclusion

The Water Resources Law, while far from being perfect, represents a progressive piece of legislation that provided guarantees of access to water for all, protected ground water resources, addressed water conservation issues and allowed private sector involvement in the provision of piped water and sanitation services to those Indonesians who have long been deprived of such access (the vast majority of the population). With its 200 articles, It attempts to comprehensively address the water and sanitation issues facing Indonesia by encouraging private investment in a sector that had been starved of funding for decades. By contrast, the Soeharto-era 1974 Water Law, which has now been reinstated by the Constitutional Court, consists of a mere 17 articles and is very vague.

Whether we like it or not, the state simply does not have the money to finance the massive investment necessary to modernize the water and sanitation sector, or, indeed, to sustainably exploit the country’s natural resources. So, until the nation can reach a consensus on the way forward in the natural resources arena, the type of confusion and lack of legal certainty that this decision has given rise to are likely to keep cropping up with regrettable regularity. 


 [i] Undang-undang No. 7/2004 tentang sumber daya air
[ii] Undang-undang No. 11/1974 tentang Pengairan
[iii] Putusan Nomor (Decision No.) 85/PUU-XI/2013
[iv] “Tjabang-tjabang produksi yang penting bagi Negara dan yang menguasasi  hadyat hidup orang banyak dikuasai oleh Negara”
[v] Decisions No. 058-059-060-063/PUU-II/2004 and No. 008/PUU-III/2005.
[vi] Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang


AHP Client Alert is a publication of Assegaf Hamzah & Partners. It brings an overview of selected Indonesian laws and regulations to the attention of clients but is not intended to be viewed or relied upon as legal advice. Clients should seek advice of qualified Indonesian legal practitioners with respect to the precise effect of the laws and regulations referred to in AHP Client Alert. Whilst care has been taken in the preparation of  AHP  Client Alert, no warranty is given as to the accuracy of the information it contains and no liability is accepted for any statement, opinion, error or omission.



  • Pic Mgmt

    Capital Markets

    As a full-service firm, we do a broad range of transactions covering the entire spectrum. Many are high profile and cement our position as a top-tier firm, including global equity offerings in reliance on Reg. S/Rule 144A, private placements, rights issues and other share-related offerings, such as convertible and exchangeable bonds. We also frequently advise on foreign offerings by issuers having significant interests in Indonesia, bond issuances under global offering rules, mergers, acquisitions, combinations of acquisitions and IPOs, consent solicitations and exchange offers of debt instruments listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange or offshore. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Banking & Finance

    We are a leading force in the Indonesian banking & finance sector, advising on all manner of structured financing transactions, from simple secured or unsecured bilateral lending to multifaceted and complex credit facilities. We handle syndicated, club and bilateral loan documentation; project finance; property finance; acquisition finance; securitization and structured finance; regulatory and compliance issues; banking documentation and legal due diligence reporting. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    General Corporate/M&A

    Our General Corporate/M&A practice provides advice on corporate governance, compliance, negotiating and drafting agreements, transaction structure, management and succession, legal due diligence reporting, formation of new entities, preparation of internal corporate documents and approvals, and completion of regulatory filings. With a wealth of experience amassed over the years in a wide variety of industries, we are strategically placed to provide you with everything you need to satisfy your corporate or M&A needs. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Debt & Corporate Restructuring

    We offer a full range of services in the debt & corporate restructuring arena, including advice on capital reduction, recapitalization and rescue schemes, financial sector takeovers, global asset recovery measures, mergers, creation of new entities, compromise schemes, demergers, buyouts, preparing documents and agreements, and ensuring statutory and regulatory compliance. As an AHP client, you will benefit from the unparalleled expertise gained by many of our senior lawyers as advisors or counsel to the Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency (IBRA), which restored the country’s banking sector to health in the wake of the Asian financial crisis of 1997/98. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Foreign Direct Investment

    As an Indonesian law firm, we are obviously very much at home in our own jurisdiction, and so are able to make you feel at home as well. We know how things work in Indonesia, and have excellent relations with all the relevant government and regulatory agencies. We advise on the establishment of foreign investment companies, permanent business establishments, subsidiaries and joint ventures under the Indonesian FDI regime, merger & acquisition issues, foreign ownership caps, manpower issues, regulatory and environmental compliance, land acquisition, taxation matters -- in fact, everything you will need to get your venture off the ground and to keep it running smoothly throughout the investment lifecycle. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Competition Law

    We are widely recognized as being at the forefront of competition law in Indonesia, a rapidly developing field in which we have been instrumental in securing a number of ground-breaking judicial precedents in recent years. We consistently focus on the practicality and commerciality aspects, and combine legal expertise with in-depth experience across a wide range of industries so as to support the achievement of your strategic goals. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Dispute Resolution

    AHP has a very strong litigation team made up of one partner and 15 associates, all of whom are licensed advocates. We regularly represent clients in tort, contract, employment, internal corporate fraud, real estate, trademark and intellectual property disputes, to name but a few, with our primary focus being on commercial disputes. In the arbitration field, we have developed a formidable reputation for expertise and successful outcomes with the result that AHP advocates regularly appear before the Indonesian National Arbitration Board (BANI), as well as overseas arbitration bodies, such as the Singapore International Arbitration Centre. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Energy, Oil and Gas

    Our Energy, Oil and Gas practice provides top-quality legal advice and transactional support to domestic and international companies operating in the oil and gas, geothermal and renewable energy sectors. As a relatively compact firm, we are able to offer advice across the entire range of practice areas, thereby allowing us to deliver outstanding legal and commercial results for our clients in a practical and cost effective way. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Projects & Natural Resources

    As an Indonesian law firm, we know our country, our regulatory environment and our governmental system. Armed with this knowledge, we have garnered a wealth of experience down the years guiding both domestic and international companies through areas that are often fraught with competing interests and controversy. This experience provides us with the expertise and breadth of vision needed to ensure successful outcomes for your business objectives. In doing so, we offer a comprehensive suite of services, all of which dovetail seamlessly one with the other so as to provide holistic solutions to all your legal needs. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Telecommunications & Media

    Indonesia has seen exponential growth over the last decade in both the telecommunications and media sectors -- both areas in which AHP is in the vanguard of legal development. Besides having a professional interest in the two sectors, all of our lawyers in the T&M practice share a genuine passion for what they do and are therefore able to offer a combination of solid technical legal knowhow and an excellent understanding of the industries, the technical aspects, the principal factors at work, and the key players in Indonesia. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Real Property

    We offer a full range of real property services, including assisting with purchase and sale agreements, leasing agreements, title searches and registrations, conveyancing, and real property dispositions and bequests,.We also provide effective and reliable advice on the complex rules governing property ownership by non-nationals in Indonesia, an area of the law that is set for liberalization in the near future. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Intellectual Property

    Our IP practice offers trademark, copyright, patent and design searches and registration, and regularly mounts successful challenges on behalf of clients against decisions of the trademark authorities. Our IP associates are all members of key associations and are frequently engaged to speak at international events as recognized leaders in the field. Combing cutting-edge expertise and a high level of commercial acumen, we take pride in our results and a high level of customer satisfaction, and do our utmost to help ensure the protection of your rights and your peace of mind. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Islamic Finance

    At AHP, we understand Islamic finance and have been in the vanguard of the sector’s rapid expansion and development in Indonesia. With an in-depth understanding of the religious and conventional legal principles that underpin the Shariah sector, we believe we are uniquely well-positioned to offer expert and innovative advice on how to conduct any transaction in a Shariah-compliant manner, and to provide the kind of end-to-end solutions that you need. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Shipping & Aviation

    As an archipelagic nation, the shipping and aviation industries are of the utmost importance to the Indonesian economy. To accommodate the needs of ship owners, charterers, and marine insurers, we provide advice on all aspects of shipping law, including ship finance & security, sale and purchase, disputes arising out of charter parties, bills of lading, insurance, and collisions, and all other admiralty matters, while in the aviation sector, we assist with aircraft financing, sale and purchase, statutory obligations related to aviation, aviation safety and the aftermath of aviation accidents. more »

  • Pic Mgmt

    Labor Law

    We have a outstanding record in representing both individuals and corporations in employment matters, and in general advisory work on the complex rules governing the employment of expatriates in Indonesia. On the litigation front, we are frequently called upon to advise in cases involving internal fraud and embezzlement, and on the remedies available to employers. We also offer expert advice on employee compensation and incentive schemes (stock options, benefits, allowances), the employment implications of mergers, acquisitions and amalgamations, and the rights and benefits available to employees upon termination. more »

Assegaf Hamzah & Partners