You are on page 1of 4

UNIVERSITAS INDONESIA

CASE STUDY: PT PGN

ARYO CANDRA HILALI

1206266290

DENNIS HASIAN

1206266366

HAFIZH ADHITAMA

1206266372

JORDAN RAMOS

1206266385

SURYA ADITAMA

1206253110

FAKULTAS EKONOMI DAN BISNIS


PROGRAM STUDI AKUNTANSI
DEPOK
April 2016

1.

Berdasarkan informasi mengenai kasus PGN yang anda miliki, indentifikasikan pelanggaran
atas prinsip dan aturan pengungkapan dan transparansi yang dilakukan oleh PGN.

Cases experienced by PT Perusahaan Gas Negara Tbk began in the fall in the sale of shares
on the stock exchange. This occured in the period 12 September 2006 to 11 January 2007.The
share prices decline is closely associated with the release of the management PGN day before.
In the press release, stated that a decline in the magnitude of the volume of gas that will be
supplied starting from 150 mmscd to 50 mmsccd. This indication is also associated with
disclosure of information concerning the commercialization of gas pipeline project PT
Perusahaan Gas Negara Tbk, which begins on June 26, 2003; The Company make an trading
agreement for gas for project in South Sumatra to West Java with Pertamina for the supply of
gas from South Sumatra to West Java, taken from an oil and gas field developed by Pertamina
through the facilities of the gas field in the southern part of Sumatra upstream operations.
Disclosure issues in this case, is caused by delays of starting the project which was originally
going to do at the end of 2006 be carried out in March 2007. The company or the new
company's management explained to the public about the delay commercialization of gas on 11
January 2007, whereas the information about their actual delay already known by the
management of PT Perusahaan gas Negara Tbk since September 12, 2006 (information about the
decrease in the volume of gas) and the date of December 18, 2006 (information about the delay
in gas).
Of the existence of these indications, after examination, it was found that PT PGN commit
the following offenses:
1. Bapepam-LK has conducted an examination of the documents and the parties relating to the
infringement of Article 86 legislation jo capital markets. 15 Regulation No. X.K.1 on Freedom
of Information that must be announced to the public by PT PGN and about providing
information that is materially untrue as referred to in Article 93 of the Capital Market Law.
2. On the violation of Article 86 of the Capital Market Act jo. Rule Number X.K.1 and violation of
Article 93 of the Capital Market Law conducted by PT PGN found evidence as follows:
a. There is a delay in reporting the disclosure of information on delays pipeline projects undertaken
by PT PGN 35 days
b. There is provision of information which is materially correct, that provide information about
planned volume of gas that can flow through SSWJ projects that are inconsistent with the fact

that there has been a change in the beginning. The facts are known or should be known by the
board of directors that should be addressed when information was provided to the public.
3. Based on the above, the Bapepam-LK sets:
a. Sanctions fines of US $ 35,000,000.00 to PT Perusahaan Gas Negara Tbk for violations of
Article 86 of the Capital Market Act jo. Rule Number X.K.1;
b. Fined Rp 5,000,000,000.00 (five billion rupiah) to the Board of Directors of PT PGN who served
during the period in July 2006 at Sutikno, fair abas, Djoko Pramono, WMP Simanjuntak and 16
Nursubagjo Prijono on offense giving information that is materially untrue as referred to in
article 93 of the Capital Market Law.

2. PGN merupakan perusahaan BUMN yang seharusnya menjadi garda terdepan untuk implementasi
tata kelola yang baik. Bagaimana pendapat anda atas pernyataan tersebut?
PGN is a state-owned company which has to implement good governance. Give you opinion about the
statement!
We agree that PGN as an state-owned company should implement good public governance.
There are several reasons why PGN should does so. Elaboration of thos reasons is stated below.
1.

One factor that caused market crash which happens in USA in 1929 and 1997 economic crisis
which happens in Indonesia, is a bad governance. The implementation of good public governance
should be done by the compny to prevent such incident to occur in the future.

2.

PGN as an state owned company runs not only to gain profit but also to fasilitate the needs of
society. Based on OECD, to prevent such incident happens which can also affected society, good
governance should be implemetned well.

3.

The practice of corruption, collusion, and nepotism in Indonesia is still high. Application of
good governance in a company is an action to mitigate those behavior.

4.

The application of good governance is beneficial to the government in form of company


value. Company which applied good governance will gain societys trust. Increasing of societys
trust will affected to the increasing of company reputation, which then affected company value.

5.

The application of good governance is also beneficial to the government in form of tax
payment. The company who applied good governance tend to pay tax better than those who dont
applied good governance.

4. Kasus PGN ini bermula dari terjadinya penurunan secara signifikan harga saham PGN di
BEJ sebesar 23,36 persen dari Rp 9.650 pada 11 Januari 2006 menjadi Rp 7.400 per lembar saham pada
12 Januari 2007. Menurut anda bagaimana pengungkapan dan transparansi yang baik yang harus
dilakukan untuk menghindari hal tersebut?
The board of director should have consciousness to disclose all of information to public not
only the good but also the bad news. If the information are deliberately not released to the public, the
management must having secret agenda to maximize their interest. This case also showing the real
practice of agency theory specifically is asymmetric information. So the role of commissioner is very
important to protect the shareholder. Board of commissioner of PGAS should supervise more to the
BoD by conducting more meeting in order to get the most updated news in company. After that, BoC
has responsibility to make sure of the news is considered significant which could affect financial
performance of company. If the news is significant, BoC should ask the BoD to release the information
to the public. So the asymmetric problem between shareholders and management could be minimized.
The condition of PGAS is owned by country and their BoC is mostly also from politician which their
independency is questionable. It very important to make sure the BoC is independent especially for the
audit committee.

You might also like