The Indonesian Constitutional Court abruptly annulled provisions regarding the function of BP Migas as state representative in managing upstream oil and gas operations in Indonesia, declaring it unconstitutional. Apparently, the Court was convinced that exercising absolute state control over hydrocarbon operations would give the utmost benefit to the people. This research argues that in achieving such goals, a state must be able to create strong administrative infrastructure and regulatory regime capable of controlling and supervising hydrocarbon operations in accordance with both national and international oil fields. Using a comparative study method with secondary data collection, this research observes Norway’s, Mexico’s, Malaysia’s, and Russia’s experiences as its underlying methodology. It examines the Court’s interpretation of “control” and “ownership” over hydrocarbon operations and provides possible solutions for the most effective and suitable institutional design for BP Migas’ replacement. Finally, it concludes that to fulfill the constitutional mandate, the government’s ability to manage oil and gas sector depends on how much it is willing to consistently: (i) implement good corporate governance among related stakeholders so as to lessen political interference in the decision-making process; and (ii) maintain the balance of ex ante procedures and the post ante monitoring system in the adopted institutional model.

中文翻译：

---

印度尼西亚的上游石油治理改革：哪种模式符合宪法？

印度尼西亚宪法法院突然废除了有关 BP Migas 作为国家代表管理印度尼西亚上游石油和天然气业务的规定，宣布其违宪。显然，法院相信对碳氢化合物业务实行绝对的国家控制会给人民带来最大的利益。本研究认为，要实现这些目标，国家必须能够建立强大的行政基础设施和监管制度，能够根据国内和国际油田控制和监督油气作业。本研究使用带有二手数据收集的比较研究方法，观察挪威、墨西哥、马来西亚和俄罗斯的经验作为其基本方法。它审查了法院对碳氢化合物运营“控制”和“所有权”的解释，并为最有效和最合适的制度设计提供了可能的解决方案，以替代 BP Migas。最后，它得出的结论是，为了履行宪法授权，政府管理石油和天然气部门的能力取决于它愿意始终如一地：（i）在相关利益相关者中实施良好的公司治理，以减少对决策的政治干预——制作过程；(ii) 在所采用的制度模式中保持事前程序和事后监控系统的平衡。它的结论是，为了履行宪法授权，政府管理石油和天然气部门的能力取决于它愿意在多大程度上始终如一：(i) 在相关利益相关者中实施良好的公司治理，以减少对决策过程的政治干预; (ii) 在所采用的制度模式中保持事前程序和事后监控系统的平衡。它的结论是，为了履行宪法授权，政府管理石油和天然气部门的能力取决于它愿意在多大程度上始终如一：(i) 在相关利益相关者中实施良好的公司治理，以减少对决策过程的政治干预; (ii) 在所采用的制度模式中保持事前程序和事后监控系统的平衡。