Electronic Theses and Dissertation

Aset kripto telah berkembang sebagai instrumen investasi digital yang menarik minat investor asing di berbagai negara. Di Indonesia, pengawasan terhadap aset kripto semula berada di bawah Badan Pengawas Perdagangan Berjangka Komoditi (Bappebti) dan dikategorikan sebagai komoditas. Sejak berlakunya Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2023 tentang Pengembangan dan Penguatan Sektor Keuangan (UU P2SK), pengawasan dialihkan ke Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (OJK). Peralihan otoritas ini menimbulkan persoalan hukum karena tidak diiringi dengan pengaturan transisional yang jelas, khususnya bagi investor asing yang telah menanamkan modal sebelum masa transisi.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji kedudukan aset kripto dalam kerangka perjanjian investasi internasional atau Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) yang mengikat Indonesia, menilai kecukupan perlindungan hukum nasional terhadap investor asing, serta menganalisis penerapan prinsip Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET) dalam konteks peralihan kewenangan pengawasan.

Metode yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, perjanjian internasional, dan doktrin hukum yang relevan untuk menelaah status hukum aset kripto sebasgai objek investasi asing.

Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa peralihan pengawasan tanpa aturan transisi mengakibatkan hilangnya hak hukum yang telah melekat, seperti keberlakuan izin yang sudah diperoleh, kepastian atas stabilitas regulasi, dan perlindungan dari beban ekonomi tambahan. Kondisi ini juga menimbulkan kewajiban izin ulang dan biaya baru yang tidak semestinya ditanggung. Sejalan dengan itu, aset kripto dapat dikualifikasikan sebagai investasi yang dilindungi dalam kerangka BIT sepanjang memenuhi syarat substantif, sesuai dengan definisi terbuka investasi yang mencakup frasa “setiap jenis kekayaan” (every kind of asset) dan “hak atas pembayaran” (claims to money). Namun, perlindungan tersebut tidak otomatis berlaku karena bergantung pada klasifikasi dan tujuan penggunaan aset kripto, apakah bersifat spekulatif atau menunjang kegiatan ekonomi produktif. Prinsip FET yang seharusnya diterapkan justru berpotensi dilanggar akibat absennya aturan transisi, inkonsistensi istilah hukum nasional dengan perjanjian internasional, serta ketiadaan mekanisme keberatan administratif. Kondisi ini pada akhirnya dapat disengketakan apabila investor merasa dirugikan.

Pemerintah perlu merumuskan aturan transisi yang tegas untuk menjamin hak investor asing, menyelaraskan hukum nasional dengan prinsip perlindungan dalam perjanjian internasional, serta menyederhanakan proses perizinan guna memperkuat kepastian hukum dan kepercayaan investor.

Cryptographic assets have developed as digital investment instruments that attract foreign investors in various countries. In Indonesia, supervision of crypto assets was initially under the authority of the Commodity Futures Trading Regulatory Agency (Bappebti) and categorized as commodities. Since the enactment of Law Number 4 of 2023 concerning the Development and Strengthening of the Financial Sector (P2SK Law), the supervisory authority has been transferred to the Financial Services Authority (OJK). This transfer of authority has created legal issues due to the absence of clear transitional provisions, particularly for foreign investors who had already invested prior to the transition period. This research aims to examine the legal standing of crypto assets within the framework of international investment agreements or Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) binding upon Indonesia, to assess the adequacy of national legal protection for foreign investors, and to analyze the application of the Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET) principle in the context of the transfer of supervisory authority. The method used is normative juridical, employing statutory, international treaty, and doctrinal approaches to examine the legal status of crypto assets as objects of foreign investment. The research findings indicate that the transfer of supervision without transitional rules has resulted in the loss of vested legal rights, such as the validity of existing licenses, regulatory stability, and protection from additional economic burdens. This condition has also led to the requirement for re-licensing and the imposition of new costs that should not have been borne. In line with this, crypto assets may be qualified as protected investments under the BIT framework insofar as they meet substantive requirements, in accordance with the open-ended definition of investment which includes the phrases “every kind of asset” and “claims to money.” However, such protection does not apply automatically, as it depends on the classification and intended use of the crypto assets—whether they are speculative in nature or serve productive economic activities. The FET principle, which should have been implemented, is potentially violated due to the absence of transitional regulations, inconsistencies between national legal terminology and international treaties, and the lack of administrative objection mechanisms. These conditions may ultimately give rise to disputes should investors feel aggrieved. The government needs to formulate clear transitional provisions to guarantee the rights of foreign investors, harmonize national laws with the protection principles contained in international treaties, and simplify the licensing process in order to strengthen legal certainty and investor confidence.