Pengenalan Koperasi

Koperasi

Koperasi adalah organisasi bisnis yang dimiliki dan dioperasikan oleh orang-seorang demi kepentingan bersama. Koperasi melandaskan kegiatan berdasarkan prinsip gerakan ekonomi rakyat yang berdasarkan asas kekeluargaan.

Prinsip Koperasi                      

Prinsip koperasi adalah suatu sistem ide-ide abstrak yang merupakan petunjuk untuk membangun koperasi yang efektif dan tahan lama. Prinsip koperasi terbaru yang dikembangkan International Cooperative Alliance (Federasi koperasi non-pemerintah internasional) adalah

·         Keanggotaan yang bersifat terbuka dan sukarela

·         Pengelolaan yang demokratis,

·         Partisipasi anggota dalam ekonomi,

·         Kebebasan dan otonomi,

·         Pengembangan pendidikan, pelatihan, dan informasi.

Di Indonesia sendiri telah dibuat UU no. 25 tahun 1992 tentang Perkoperasian. Prinsip koperasi menurut UU no. 25 tahun 1992 adalah:

·         Keanggotaan bersifat sukarela dan terbuka

·         Pengelolaan dilakukan secara demokrasi

·         Pembagian SHU dilakukan secara adil sesuai dengan jasa usaha masing-masing anggota

·         Pemberian balas jasa yang terbatas terhadap modal

·         Kemandirian

·         Pendidikan perkoperasian

·         Kerjasama antar koperasi

Prinsip Koperasi berdasarkan UU No. 17 Th. 2012, yaitu:

·         Modal terdiri dari simpanan pokok dan surat modal koperasi(SMK) 

Bentuk dan Jenis Koperasi

Jenis Koperasi menurut fungsinya

·         Koperasi pembelian/pengadaan/konsumsi adalah koperasi yang menyelenggarakan fungsi pembelian atau pengadaan barang dan jasa untuk memenuhi kebutuhan anggota sebagai konsumen akhir. Di sini anggota berperan sebagai pemilik dan pembeli atau konsumen bagi koperasinya.

·         Koperasi penjualan/pemasaran adalah koperasi yang menyelenggarakan fungsi distribusi barang atau jasa yang dihasilkan oleh anggotanya agar sampai di tangan konsumen. Di sini anggota berperan sebagai pemilik dan pemasok barang atau jasa kepada koperasinya.

·         Koperasi produksi adalah koperasi yang menghasilkan barang dan jasa, dimana anggotanya bekerja sebagai pegawai atau karyawan koperasi. Di sini anggota berperan sebagai pemilik dan pekerja koperasi.

·         Koperasi jasa adalah koperasi yang menyelenggarakan pelayanan jasa yang dibutuhkan oleh anggota, misalnya: simpan pinjam, asuransi, angkutan, dan sebagainya. Di sini anggota berperan sebagai pemilik dan pengguna layanan jasa koperasi.

Apabila koperasi menyelenggarakan satu fungsi disebut koperasi tunggal usaha (single purpose cooperative), sedangkan koperasi yang menyelenggarakan lebih dari satu fungsi disebut koperasi serba usaha (multi purpose cooperative).

Jenis koperasi berdasarkan tingkat dan luas daerah kerja

·         Koperasi Primer

Koperasi primer ialah koperasi yang yang minimal memiliki anggota sebanyak 20 orang perseorangan.

·         Koperasi Sekunder

Adalah koperasi yang terdiri dari gabungan badan-badan koperasi serta memiliki cakupan daerah kerja yang luas dibandingkan dengan koperasi primer. Koperasi sekunder dapat dibagi menjadi :

·         Koperasi Pusat

Adalah koperasi yang beranggotakan paling sedikit 5 koperasi primer

·         Gabungan Koperasi

Adalah koperasi yang anggotanya minimal 3 koperasi pusat

·         Induk Koperasi

Adalah koperasi yang minimum anggotanya adalah 3 gabungan koperasi

Jenis Koperasi menurut status keanggotaannya

·         Koperasi produsen adalah koperasi yang anggotanya para produsen barang/jasa dan memiliki rumah tangga usaha.

·         Koperasi konsumen adalah koperasi yang anggotanya para konsumen akhir atau pemakai barang/jasa yang ditawarkan para pemasok di pasar.

Kedudukan anggota di dalam koperasi dapat berada dalam salah satu status atau keduanya. Dengan demikian pengelompokkan koperasi menurut status anggotanya berkaitan erat dengan pengelompokan koperasi menurut fungsinya.

Keunggulan Koperasi

Kemungkinan koperasi untuk memperoleh keunggulan komparatif dari perusahaan lain cukup besar mengingat koperasi mempunyai potensi kelebihan antara lain pada skala ekonomi, aktivitas yang nyata, faktor-faktor precuniary, dan lain-lain.

Kewirausahaan Koperasi

Kewirausahaan koperasi adalah suatu sikap mental positif dalam berusaha secara koperatif, dengan mengambil prakarsa inovatif serta keberanian mengambil risiko dan berpegang teguh pada prinsip identitas koperasi, dalam mewujudkan terpenuhinya kebutuhan nyata serta peningkatan kesejahteraan bersama. Dari definisi tersebut, maka dapat dikemukakan bahwa kewirausahaan koperasi merupakan sikap mental positif dalam berusaha secara koperatif
Tugas utama wirakop adalah mengambil prakarsa inovatif, artinya berusaha mencari, menemukan, dan memanfaatkan peluang yang ada demi kepentingan bersama. Kewirausahaan dalam koperasi dapat dilakukan oleh anggota, manajer birokrat yang berperan dalam pembangunan koperasi dan katalis, yaitu orang yang peduli terhadap pengembangan koperasi.

Pengurus

Pengurus koperasi dipilih dari kalangan dan oleh anggota dalam suatu rapat anggota. Ada kalanya rapat anggota tersebut tidak berhasil memilih seluruh anggota Pengurus dari kalangan anggota sendiri. Hal demikian umpamanya terjadi jika calon-calon yang berasal dari kalangan-kalangan anggota sendiri tidak memiliki kesanggupan yang diperlukan untuk memimpin koperasi yang bersangkutan, sedangkan ternyata bahwa yang dapat memenuhi syarat-syarat ialah mereka yang bukan anggota atau belum anggota koperasi (mungkin sudah turut dilayani oleh koperasi akan tetapi resminya belum meminta menjadi anggota).

Koperasi di Indonesia

Koperasi di Indonesia, menurut UU tahun 1992, didefinisikan sebagai badan usaha yang beranggotakan orang-seorang atau badan hukum koperasi dengan melandaskan kegiatannya berdasarkan prinsip-prinsip koperasi sekaligus sebagai gerakan ekonomi rakyat yang berdasar atas asas kekeluargaan. Di Indonesia, prinsip koperasi telah dicantumkan dalam UU No. 12 Tahun 1967 dan UU No. 25 Tahun 1992.
Prinsip koperasi di Indonesia kurang lebih sama dengan prinsip yang diakui dunia internasional dengan adanya sedikit perbedaan, yaitu adanya penjelasan mengenai SHU (Sisa Hasil Usaha).

Sejarah koperasi di Indonesia

Sejarah singkat gerakan koperasi bermula pada abad ke-20 yang pada umumnya merupakan hasil dari usaha yang tidak spontan dan tidak dilakukan oleh orang-orang yang sangat kaya. Koperasi tumbuh dari kalangan rakyat, ketika penderitaan dalam lapangan ekonomi dan sosial yang ditimbulkan oleh sistem kapitalisme semakin memuncak. Beberapa orang yang penghidupannya sederhana dengan kemampuan ekonomi terbatas, terdorong oleh penderitaan dan beban ekonomi yang sama, secara spontan mempersatukan diri untuk menolong dirinya sendiri dan manusia sesamanya.

Pada tahun 1896 seorang Pamong Praja Patih R.Aria Wiria Atmaja di Purwokerto mendirikan sebuah Bank untuk para pegawai negeri (priyayi). Ia terdorong oleh keinginannya untuk menolong para pegawai yang makin menderita karena terjerat oleh lintah darat yang memberikan pinjaman dengan bunga yang tinggi. Maksud Patih tersebut untuk mendirikan koperasi kredit model seperti di Jerman. Cita-cita semangat tersebut selanjutnya diteruskan oleh De Wolffvan Westerrode, seorang asisten residen Belanda. De Wolffvan Westerrode sewaktu cuti berhasil mengunjungi Jerman dan menganjurkan akan mengubah Bank Pertolongan Tabungan yang sudah ada menjadi Bank Pertolongan, Tabungan dan Pertanian. Selain pegawai negeri juga para petani perlu dibantu karena mereka makin menderita karena tekanan para pengijon. Ia juga menganjurkan mengubah Bank tersebut menjadi koperasi. Di samping itu ia pun mendirikan lumbung-lumbung desa yang menganjurkan para petani menyimpan pada pada musim panen dan memberikan pertolongan pinjaman padi pada musim paceklik. Ia pun berusaha menjadikan lumbung-lumbung itu menjadi Koperasi Kredit Padi. Tetapi Pemerintah Belanda pada waktu itu berpendirian lain. Bank Pertolongan, Tabungan dan Pertanian dan Lumbung Desa tidak dijadikan Koperasi tetapi Pemerintah Belanda membentuk lumbung-lumbung desa baru, bank –bank Desa , rumah gadai dan Centrale Kas yang kemudian menjadi Bank Rakyat Indonesia (BRI). Semua itu adalah badan usaha Pemerntah dan dipimpin oleh orang-orang Pemerintah.

Pada zaman Belanda pembentuk koperasi belum dapat terlaksana karena:

1.      Belum ada instansi pemerintah ataupun badan non pemerintah yang memberikan penerangan dan penyuluhan tentang koperasi.

2.      Belum ada Undang-Undang yang mengatur kehidupan koperasi.

3.      Pemerintah jajahan sendiri masih ragu-ragu menganjurkan koperasi karena pertimbangan politik, khawatir koperasi itu akan digunakan oleh kaum politik untuk tujuan yang membahayakan pemerintah jajahan itu.

Mengantisipasi perkembangan koperasi yang sudah mulai memasyarakat, Pemerintah Hindia Belanda mengeluarkan peraturan perundangan tentang perkoperasian. Pertama, diterbitkan Peraturan Perkumpulan Koperasi No. 43, Tahun 1915, lalu pada tahun 1927 dikeluarkan pula Peraturan No. 91, Tahun 1927, yang mengatur Perkumpulan-Perkumpulan Koperasi bagi golongan Bumiputra. Pada tahun 1933, Pemerintah Hindia-Belanda menetapkan Peraturan Umum Perkumpulan-Perkumpulan Koperasi No. 21, Tahun 1933. Peraturan tahun 1933 itu, hanya diberlakukan bagi golongan yang tunduk kepada tatanan hukum Barat, sedangkan Peraturan tahun 1927, berlaku bagi golongan Bumiputra. Diskriminasi pun diberlakukan pada tataran kehidupan berkoperasi.

Pada tahun 1908, Budi Utomo yang didirikan oleh Dr. Sutomo memberikan peranan bagi gerakan koperasi untuk memperbaiki kehidupan rakyat. Pada tahun 1915 dibuat peraturan Verordening op de Cooperatieve Vereeniging, dan pada tahun 1927 Regeling Inlandschhe Cooperatieve.
Pada tahun 1927 dibentuk Serikat Dagang Islam, yang bertujuan untuk memperjuangkan kedudukan ekonomi pengusah-pengusaha pribumi. Kemudian pada tahun 1929, berdiri Partai Nasional Indonesia yang memperjuangkan penyebarluasan semangat koperasi.

Namun, pada tahun 1933 keluar UU yang mirip UU no. 431 sehingga mematikan usaha koperasi untuk yang kedua kalinya. Pada tahun 1942 Jepang menduduki Indonesia. Jepang lalu mendirikan koperasi kumiyai. Awalnya koperasi ini berjalan mulus. Namun fungsinya berubah drastis dan menjadi alat Jepang untuk mengeruk keuntungan, dan menyengsarakan rakyat Indonesia.

Setelah Indonesia merdeka, pada tanggal 12 Juli 1947, pergerakan koperasi di Indonesia mengadakan Kongres Koperasi yang pertama di Tasikmalaya. Hari ini kemudian ditetapkan sebagai Hari Koperasi Indonesia. Sekaligus membentuk Sentral Organisasi Koperasi Rakyat Indonesia (SOKRI) yang berkedudukan di Tasikmalaya (Bandung sebagai ibukota provinsi sedang diduduki oleh tentara Belanda).

Fungsi dan peran koperasi Indonesia

Menurut Undang-undang No. 25 tahun 1992 Pasal 4 dijelaskan bahwa koperasi memiliki fungsi dan peranan antara lain yaitu mengembangkan potensi dan kemampuan ekonomi anggota dan masyarakat, berupaya mempertinggi kualitas kehidupan manusia, memperkokoh perekonomian rakyat, mengembangkan perekonomian nasional, serta mengembangkan kreativitas dan jiwa berorganisasi bagi pelajar bangsa.

Koperasi berlandaskan hukum

Koperasi berbentuk Badan Hukum menurut Undang-Undang No.12 tahun 1967 adalah [Organisasi] ekonomi rakyat yang berwatak sosial, beranggotakan orang-orang atau badan hukum koperasi yang merupakan tata susunan ekonomi sebagai usaha bersama, berdasarkan asas kekeluargaan. Kinerja koperasi khusus mengenai perhimpunan, koperasi harus bekerja berdasarkan ketentuan undang-undang umum mengenai organisasi usaha (perseorangan, persekutuan, dsb.) serta hukum dagang dan hukum pajak.

PRINSIP – PRINSIP KOPERASI

Prinsip – prinsip koperasi adalah garis –garis penuntun yang digunakan oleh koperasi untuk melaksanakan nilai – nilai tersebut dalam praktik.

• Prinsip pertama : keanggotaan Sukarela dan Terbuka

Koperasi – koperasi adalah perkumpulan – perkumpulan sukarela, terbuka bagi semua orang yang mampu menggunakan jasa – jasa perkumpulan dan bersedia menerima tanggung jawab keanggotaan, tanpa diskriminasi jender, social, rasial, politik atau agama.

• Prisip kedua : Pengendalian oleh Anggota Secara demokratis

Koperasi – koperasi adalah perkumpulan – perkumpulan demokratis yang dikendalikan oleh para anggota secara aktif berpartisipasi dalam penetapan kebijakan – kebijakan perkumpulan dan mengambil keputusan –  keputusan. Pria dan wanita mengabdi sebagai wakil – wakil yang dipilih, bertanggung jawab kepada para anggota. Dalam koperasi primer anggota – anggota mempunyai hak – hak suara yang sama ( satu anggota, satu suara ), dan koperasi pada tingkatan – tingkatan lain juga di atur secara demokratis.

• Prinsip ketiga : Partisipasi Ekonomi Anggota

Anggota – anggota menyumbang secara adil dan mengendalikan secara demokrasi modal dari koperasi mereka. Sekurang – kurangnya sebagian dari modal tersebut biasanya merupakan milik bersama dari koperasi. Anggota – anggota biasanya menerima kompensasi yang terbatas, bilamana ada, terhadap modal. Anggota – anggota membagi surplus – surplus untuk sesuatu atau tujuan – tujuan sebagai berikut :

Ø  Pengembangan koperasi – koperasi mereka

Ø  Kemungkinan dengan membentuk cadangan sekurang – kurangnya sebagian padanya tidak dapat dibagi – bagi

Ø  Pemberian manfaat kepada anggota – anggota sebanding dengan transaksi – transaksi mereka dengan koperasi

Ø  Mendukung kegiatan – kegiatan yang disetujui oleh anggota

• Prinsip keempat : Otonomi Dan Kebebasan

Koperasi – koperasi bersifat otonom, merupakan perkumpulan – perkumpulan yang menolong diri sendiri dan dikendalikan oleh anggota – anggotanya. Koperasi – koperasi mengadakan kesepakatan –kesepakatan  dengan perkumpulan – perkumpulan lain, termasuk pemerintah, atau memperoleh modal dari sumber – sumber luar, dan hal itu dilakukan dengan persyaratan – persyaratan yang menjamin adanya pengendalian anggota – anggota serta dipertahankannya ekonomi koperasi.

• Prinsip kelima : Pendidikan, Pelatihan, dan Informasi

Koperasi – koperasi menyelenggarakan pendidikan dan pelatihan bagi anggota – anggotanya, para wakil yang dipilih, manajer dan karyawan, sehingga mereka dapat memberikan sumbangan yang efektif bagi perkembangan koperasi – koperasi mereka. Mereka memberi informasi kepada masyarakat umum, khususnya orang – orang muda pemimpin – pemimpin opini masyarakat mengenai sifat dan kemanfaatan – kemanfaatan kerjasama.

• Prinsip keenam : Kerjasama diantara Koperasi

Koperasi – koperasi akan dapat memberikan pelayanan paling efektif kepada para anggota dan memperkuat gerakan koperasi dengan cara bekerja sama melalui struktur – struktur local, nasional, regional, dan internasional.

• Prinsip ketujuh : Kepedulian Terhadap Komunitas

Koperasi – koperasi bekerja bagi pembangunan yang berkesinambungan dari komunikasi – komunitas mereka melalui kebijakan – kebijakan yang disetujui oleh anggota – anggotanya.

Beberapa prinsip – prinsip koperasi yang didapatkan dari berbagai sumber, sebagai berikut :

1. Prinsip menurut Munkner

Hans H. Munkner menyarikan 12 prinsip koperasi yang ditunkan dari 7 variabel gagasan umum sebagai berikut :

• 7 variabel gagasan umum :

1. Menolong diri sendiri berdasarkan kesetiakawanan ( self-help based on solidarity )
2. Demokrasi ( democracy )
3. kekuatan modal tidak diutamakan ( neutaralited Capital )
4. ekonomi ( Economy )
5. Kebebasan ( Liberty )
6. Keadilan ( Equity )
7. Memajukan kehidupan social melalui pendidikan ( Social Advancement Through Education )

• 12 Prinsip koperasi :

1. Keanggotaan bersifat sukarela (Valuntarily membership )
2. Keanggotaan terbuka ( Open membership )
3. Pengembangan anggota ( Member Promotion )
4. Identitas sebagai pemilik dan pelanggan ( Identity of co-owners and customers )
5. Manajemen dan pengawasan dilaksanakan secara demokratis (Democratic management and control)
6. Koperasi sebagai kumpulan orang – orang ( Personal Cooperation)
7. Modal yang berkaitan dengan aspek social tidak dibagi (Indivisible social capital)
8. Efisiensi ekonomi dari perusahaan koperasi (Economic efficiency of the cooperative enterprise)
9. Perkumpulan dengan sukarela ( Valuntarily association )
10. Kebebasan dalam pengambilan keputusan dan penetapan tujuan (Autonomy in goal setting and the decision making)
11. Pendistribusi yang adil dan merata akan hasil – hasil ekonomi (Fair and just distribution of economic result)
12. Pendidikan anggota ( Member Education ) 

2.      Prinsip menurut Rochdale ( Equitable Pioner’s Rochdale )

         Prinsip – prinsip koperasi rochdale menurut bentuk dan sifat aslinya :

1. Pengawasan secara demokratis ( Democratic Control )
2. Keanggotaan yang terbuka ( Open membership )
3. Bunga atas modal dibatasi ( a fixed or limited interest on capital )
4. Pembagian sisa hasil usaha ( SHU ) kepada anggota sebanding dengan jasa masing – masing anggota ( The distribution of surplus in dividend to the members in proportion to their purchases )
5. Penjualan sepenuhnya dengan tunai ( Trading strictly on a cash basis )
6. Barang – barang yang dijual harus asli dan tidak dipalsukan ( Selling only pure and unadulterated goods )
7. Netral terhadap politik dan agama ( Political and religious neutrality )

Prinsip – prinsip koperasi Rochdale ini selanjutnya merupakan landasan kerja koperasi :

1. Pembelian barang secara tunai
2. Harga jual sama dengan harga barang pasar setempat
3. Mutu barang baik, timbangan dan ukurannya benar
4. Pemberian bunga atas modal dibatasi
5. Keuntungan dibagi berdasarkan banyaknya pembelian
6. Sebagian keuntungan dipergunakan untuk cadangan dana pendidikan, dan dana social
7. Keanggotaan terbuka untuk umum, netral terhadap agama dan politik

3.      Prinsip menurut Raiffeisen

         Prinsip Raiffeisen adalah sebagai berikut :

1. Swadaya
2. Daerah kerja terbatas
3. SHU untuk cadangan
4. Tanggung jawab anggota tidak terbatas
5. Pengurus bekerja atas dasar kesukarelaan
6. Usaha hanya kepada anggota
7. Keanggotaan atas dasar watak, bukan uang

Untuk itu Raiffeisen memupuk modal dari para pemilik modal dengan bunga yang sangat rendah. Landasan dan cara kerja yang ditempuh oleh F.W Raiffeisen adalah :

1. Petani dibiasakan untuk menabung
2. Adanya pengawasan terhadap pemakaian kredit
3. Keanggotaan dibatasi agar antar anggota dapat saling mengenal dan dapat bekerja sama dengan baik
4. Pengelolaan oleh anggota dan tidak mendapat upah
5. keuntungan bersih menjadi milik bersama

Koperasi ini menjadi kredit union dan Basnk Perkreditan Rakyat yang kemudian dikenal sebagai Bank Raiffeisen.

4.      Prinsip menurut Schulze

         Untuk membentuk koperasi kredit atau Bank Tabungan Kredit adalah dengan cara :

1. Membeli saham untuk menjadi anggota
2. Mengumpulkan modal dari penyambung yang mau memberikan uangnya sebagai modal
3. Membatasi pinjaman untuk jangka pendek
4. Menetapkan wilayah kerja diperkotaan
5. Menggaji para pengurus
6. Membagi keuntungan kepada para anggota

Herman Schulze yang dikembangkan didaerah pinggiran kota ( urban ). Inti prinsip Herman Schulze adalah sebagai berikut :

1. Swadaya
2. SHU untuk cadanan dan untuk dibagikan kepada anggotanya
3. Tanggung jawab anggota terbatas
4. Pengurus bekerja dengan mendapatkan imbalan
5. Usaha tidak terbatas tidak hanya untuk anggota

6.      Prinsip menurut ICA ( International Cooperative Allience )          

ICA ( International Cooperative alliance ) yang didirikan pada tahun 1895 merupakan organisasi gerakan koperasi yang tertinggi didunia.

Dalam BAB IV Undang – undang NO. 12 Tahun 1967 yang membahas asas dan sendi dasar koperasi, dimana dikatakan bahwa asas koperasi adalah kekeluargaan dan kegotong – royongan, sednagkan dalam sendi dasar koperasdi di antaranya dimasukan keanggotaan yang sukarela, pembagian sisa hasil usaha diatur menurut masing – masing anggota, pembatasan bunga atas modal dan sebagainya, yang semua ini oleh ICA dikelompokkan sebagai Cooperative Principles.

Sidang ICA pada tahun 1966 merumuskan prinsip – prinsip koperasi, dirinci sebagai berikut:

* Keanggotaan koperasi secara terbuka tanpa adanya pembatasan yang dibuat – buat ( Open and voluntarily membership )

* Kepimpinan yang demokrasi atas dasar satu orang satu suara (Democratic control – one member one vote)

* Modal menerima bunag yang terbatas, itupun bila ada ( Limited interest of capital )

* SHU dibagi tiga :

1)      Sebagian untuk cadangan

2)      Sebagian untuk masyarakat

3)      Sebagian untuk dibagikan kembali kepada anggota sesuai dengan jasa masing – masing

* Semua koperasi harus melaksanakan pendidikan secara terus menerus (Promotion of Education)

* Gerakan koperasi harus melaksanakan kerja sama yang erat, baik di tingkat regional, nasional, maupu internasional (Intercooperative network)

7.      Prinsip menurut M.M Coady

M.M Coady mengembangkan bentuk koperasi dengan cara mengadakan pendidikan kepada orang yang telah dewasa. Lembaga pendidikan formal yang membantu mengembangkan koprasi tersebut adalah Coady International Institute di Kanada.

8.      Prinsip – prinsip koperasi Indonesia

    * Menurut Undang – undang No.12 Yahun 1967

Jika dilihat dari sejarah perundang – undangan koperasi Indonesia, maka sejak Indonesia merdeka sudah ada empat undang – undang menyangkut perkoperasian, yaitu :

1)      Undang – undang No. 79 Tahu 1958 tentang perkumpulan koperasi

2)      Undang – undang No. 14 Tahun 1965

3)      Undang – undang No. 12 Tahun 1967 tentang pokok- pokok perkoperasian

4)      Undang – undang No. 25 Tahun 1992 tentang perkoperasian

Prinsip – prinsip atau sendi – sendi dasar koperasi menurut undang – undang No. 12 tahun 1967, adalah sebagai berikut

1. Sifat keanggotaannya sukarela dan terbuka untuk setiap warga Negara Indonesia
2. Rapat Anggota merupakan kekuasaan tertinggi sebagai pencerminan demokrasi dalam koperasi
3. Pembagian SHU diatur menurut jasa masing – masing anggota
4. Adanya pembatasan bunga atas modal
5. Mengembangkan kesejahteraan anggota khususnya dan masyarakat umumnya
6. Usaha dan ketatalaksanaannya bersifat terbuka
7. Swadaya, swakarta, dan swasembada sebagai pencerminan prinsip dasar percaya diri sendiri

* Menurut Undang – undang No. 25 Tahun 1992

Prinsip – prinsip menurut undang – undang No. 25 tahun 1992 Pasal 5 dan yang berlaku saat ini di Indonesia disebutkan prinsip koperasi adalah sebagai berikut :

1)      Keanggotaan bersifat sukarela dan terbuka

2)      Pengelolaan dilakukan secara demokratis

3)      Pembagian Sisa Hasil Usaha ( SHU ) dilakukan secara adil sebanding dengan besarnya jasa usaha masing – masing anggota (andil anggota tersebut dalam koperasi)

4)      Pemberian balas jasa terhadap modal terbatas

5)      Kemandirian

6)      Pendidikan perkoperasian

7)      Kerjasama antar koperasi

Why can't we have human rights and economic growth?

Hugh Muir talks to former World Bank economist William Easterly about how he changed his mind on the political ramifications of aid. Plus, how Somaliland defied the critics to become a democracy

HM Prof William Easterly was for 16 years an economist at the World Bank.

WE I was in the research department, which by World Bank standards actually. I had a lot of intellectual freedom, but not quite enough.

HM And the World Bank has for many years had a problem with human rights; it didn't discuss them. Was there a point at which the World Bank you thought: 'I'm on the wrong side here, I've got to leave and maybe have the freedom to speak differently and to do this differently?'

WE Well, one thing I remember is some time in the mid '90s going to an Africa region meeting and everyone around the table were going hey, for Africa, it's really not working, and then the conclusion of the meeting is, we should keep doing it. And it's like what is going on here, we know it's not working and yet we keep doing it. Why?

HM But since leaving the organisation Professor Easterly has had a change of heart.

WE I'm sort of a recovering expert, trying to spread the news to the other experts.

HM This is The Guardian's Liz Ford.

LF So we're at the Ending Sexual Violence in Conflict Summit that's being held at the ExCeL Centre in London.

HM You may remember that this was the event attended by Angelina Jolie. We sent Liz down earlier in the month to record this and some of the people attending that summit.
LF But I think there's probably a lot of people that are thinking, are a little bit concerned that there's a strong focus on ending impunity, a strong focus on getting the prosecutions, and not enough on the wider issues, as in women's economic empowerment.

FS1 When we think of them, the human rights things, you know, the first things is how they can survive, how they can have access of the food in the evening, you know. That comes first. So basically it comes first for the widows.

FS2 Women need economic empowerment to have the whole world [in] peace and stability.

LF Yes, they want justice, but getting somebody to court is not their priority, their priority is getting a job, getting money, getting away from the actual abuse, supporting their children, getting them an education, getting decent healthcare, all those other things.

FS3 They talk about political participation, they don't talk about economic empowerment. So it's all interlinked and unless we address the issue holistically then separate interventions will be ineffective.

HM So it begs the question, what comes first, economic empowerment to better your life or basic human rights, and why can't we talk about the two together? We'll find out on today's Global development podcast. I'm Hugh Muir, stay with us. But first, back to Prof Easterly. He says vital development is blighted by technocrats. I caught up with him on the phone line from New York and asked him what was going wrong.

WE I think it's because there's this fascination in development with development as an exclusively technical problem that is just about technical fixes like bednets for malaria or medications for malaria or antibiotics for other health problems, and the reason these technical solutions have been neglected is because our people are pressed by autocrats who have no interest in their wellbeing, they only have an interest in staying in power. There is a World Bank project in Uganda that had the idea that this one district of Uganda called Mubende could be very profitably developed as a forestry project and that forestry was the best use of the land there. The World Bank in this case was sort of like a counterpart of the British colonial authorities deciding what is best. The farmers on the land who were growing their own food crops were not on board with this and, unfortunately, what happened was this was settled with violence. A private company that the World Bank was working with to develop this project hired security forces who came in and marched the farmers off at gunpoint, burned down their homes, burned down their crops, an eight-year-old child died in the fire that happened with this, the farmers were kept at gunpoint from rescuing the child or their own homes and 20,000 farmers were marched off at gunpoint and told this land is no longer yours. This is this kind of tragedy that happens when we neglect the rights of the people. You do something that you think is making them better off and it's actually making people worse off because you did not give them the right to consent, you did not respect their right to consent.

HM It's difficult though, isn't it, because big organisations who hope to help with big budgets that are obviously wary of just handing that money over want to know that it's being done properly. Isn't there a limit to the extent to which you can work from bottom up, isn't it almost inevitable there'll be some element of top down?

WE Well, if you're saying that you need to sort of work with the governments that are there, even if they're authoritarian, I think that is the perennial dilemma in the aid business. And I don't want to say there is any easy answer to that, there is not an easy answer, I mean I think certainly to being to come to an answer you certainly do want to cut off governments that are simply using their own aid money for their own repression and I think the more important thing that has happened as a result of that discussion is the official aid community has just decided that we're sort of not allowed to talk about autocracy and oppressive governments because this issue is so unsolvable and so there's a sort of unintentional censorship of the big debate that we should be having in development, you know, is autocracy itself one of the main causes of poverty?HM The likes of Bill Gates and Jeffrey Sachs have looked at the things that you're saying and have made the point that you might be ignoring some of the big success stories in modern aid, things like the polio immunisation programme, things I suppose that can only be done by big organisations that go into a country and things that in a way are best done from the top down.

WA You know, I've never said aid always fails, there are successes in aid, even in very top-down aids and because there are some problems that are more amenable to top-down aid intervention. And I think the one you mention is exactly the most common one, polio and other vaccination programmes is the one that's cited over and over again by Gates and Sachs and other aid defenders. Why are they stuck with only this one example that they cite over and over again, or only a few other examples? It's because there was this one problem that was more amenable to top-down aid and it got solved, that's great, I'm glad it happened, but it's not the way the whole world of development works.

HM Obviously, it's shaken things up, what if we were to ignore your detractors and made you king for the day, how would things be different? There's a calibration to be done here, how would you calibrate things differently?

WE We need say like a Copernican Revolution in development. What's really been happening is we place ourselves, the aid and development experts at kind of the whole centre of development and we obsess with this sort of what should we do question and what the western efforts should be, which is very understandable and I want the west to continue to do good things but we're not at the centre of development and the Copernican Revolution would recognise that it's poor people themselves who are at the centre of development and they are already successfully developing themselves.

There's already been tremendous successes in development that are homegrown that are due to poor people and poor societies asserting their own rights themselves. And we should not have the arrogance that everything in development revolves around us, the experts, that's what most fundamentally at the end of the day I protest against most. There's arrogance and there's egocentricity and self-centredness that we place ourselves, the experts, at the whole centre of global development and we don't deserve that, we're not at the centre, we're very marginal, it's poor people themselves who are developing themselves.

HM Professor William Easterly, author of The Tyranny of Experts, and that's available now. Professor Easterly talked about countries being helped to help themselves. Let's consider the case of Somaliland. Mark Anderson reports.

MA Somaliland is the world's fourth poorest country, if it was a country, but it's not, because no one in the international community recognises Somaliland as a sovereign state and it receives no direct aid. You might think Somaliland would be held back by this lack of aid but it's actually done very well. There's been two presidential elections which passed without incident and the international observers of those elections were so enamoured with Somaliland's case for recognition that they founded an NGO specifically to champion Somaliland's cause. In Somaliland's capital, Hargeisa, Hibo Mohamed Esayhas been running a small catering business. It's been going two years.

HME We are cooking refreshments for meetings for places like the government. Also, we are receiving orders from homes and weddings. So me, I like Somaliland and living here. Everybody's coming back to Somaliland. If you look back 10 years, for example, in the shops and the hotels there's no more than 10 hotels in Hargeisa but now you cannot count the number of hotels in Hargeisa. As well as the printing press, shops, everywhere you go there's a small business. So there's a lot of people in Hargeisa now so as much as the people are there and they are buying with no war, with no anything that they are afraid of. So I can say it's growing.

HM But not everyone is as positive as Hibo, Somaliland has come under fire from rights groups for attacks on journalists and poor treatment of Ethiopian and Somali migrants who pass through Somaliland on their way to Yemen. But few can argue with Somaliland's stable democracy and thriving businesses like Hibo's. It's doing far better than its neighbours to the south.
HME If you look at the freedom and the democracy that has taken place in Somaliland, I can say that it's better than so many countries in Africa, and whenever the problems happen there's a fight which has never stopped, but Somalians have reached a level that we have the ability to stop war and to establish a peace.

HM Hibo Mohamed Esay in Hargeisa. So we've got plenty of examples of where aid is going wrong, and going right, and with me now to pick through some of these ideas we have something of an international line-up. From Washington, Jessica Evans of Human Rights Watch, she's a senior researcher in their Business and Human Rights Division, and in Geneva we have Jayati Ghosh, Professor of Economics at Nehru University, New Delhi, and the executive secretary of International Development Economics Associates. Welcome to both of you. Jayati, let me start with you. This is basically what Professor Easterly talks about in his book, The Tyranny of Experts. It refers to Somaliland which is an economy that's benefited from improved human rights and democracy, and here's the important thing, without the technocrats getting involved. Is that a phenomenon that you recognise?

JG Oh, absolutely, I don't think that technocrats have been particularly successful, certainly in the international development industry, but I wouldn't say that's because they are technocrats per se, I would argue that, number one, they're divorced from the particular domestic positions, but more than that they are all influenced by a rather stale and mechanical paradigm of how economies should be run, which I really think is counterproductive. This so-called Washington consensus which should have died several decades ago is back and alive and kicking, and unfortunately is still being imposed all over the world regardless of context, regardless of usefulness and regardless of notions of economic democracy.

HM Jessica, to what extent do you think we can hold Somaliland up as a model of good practice?

JE I can't speak directly to Somaliland, but one thing that we constantly see is that development is not understood in the same way that it should be. So sustainable development, we believe, is freedom from fear and want for all without discrimination. Sustainable development should be about the creation of conditions in which people everywhere can realise their civil and political rights as well as their economic, social and cultural ones. I think what Professor Easterly is pushing for here is for increased recognition of civil and political and some economic rights, and that being the basis for development. I think Human Rights Watch and many human rights advocates would go that step further to say that development needs to be grounded in all of the human rights that we've been fighting for.

HM Jayati, talk to me about the balance, the ratio if you like of human rights to economic development, economic empowerment. Is the balance right?

JG No not at all, in fact one of the big problems I see, both in the international shall we say the multilateral community as well as in many developing countries today is that in a sense there's a kind of trade-off, we are told by many of our governments, my own at the moment, but a number of others across the world, that look, we're going to give you growth and development, we'll try and give you electricity and roads and water and so on, and in return for that just shut up and do as we tell you. In other words, don't ask for higher wages, don't complain if you're displaced by a project, don't worry about environmental standards, don't worry about Workers' rights and living wages, because these are all costs you have to pay for this grand process of development.

HM Jessica, does that ring a bell with you and if so, give us some examples of where that's been the case, that's been how things have unfolded?

JE One example that comes to mind is the World Bank's engagement with Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan is anything but a democratic country and human rights violations are really widespread. One particularly problematic industry within Uzbekistan is the cotton industry, which is grounded in a system of forced labour. Every year the government mobilises over a million of its citizens, including children, to pick cotton. What the World Bank has just earlier this month approved is an irrigation project which is going to directly benefit the cotton industry. It's going to provide water to cotton farms, and while the World Bank as a positive development taken some moves to mitigate these risks of forced labour it's not doing anything to actually dismantle that system which continues and will continue with this project. So the World Bank has for instance put in place third party monitors to look at whether there is forced labour on the areas within which the project is being carried out, but on the other side the World Bank has done nothing to ensure that independent journalists and civil society organisations which often monitor the cotton harvest can do so, even with respect to the land on which the World Bank is financing an irrigation project. So this shows I think how in some respects the World Bank is willing to recognise what we would consider human rights risks, but not willing to go that extra step to work toward an environment in which Uzbek citizens can themselves work to realise their own human rights.

HM Jayati, what's your sense of the role or the balance that's being struck by the World Bank?

JG Well, you know the World Bank I don't believe is really the most important player anymore in many developing countries, certainly it is promoting projects that are, shall we say, inconsistent with some of these goals that Jessica mentioned but really when you're looking at patterns of investment or even patterns of control over social dissent and all of that, it's really not the World Bank that is the most important player any more, and I think we have to be much more concerned about how the international rules, treaties, whether it comes from the bilateral investment treaties, whether it comes from the GATT rules or WTO and so on, whether these actually impact on the policy space that governments have to promote the rights of citizens. And also the governments themselves, how concerned are they in terms of ensuring this balance. I'd like to give one example from India if I may. You know, we've had very recently, after the new government came to power in India, we've had a report published by the Intelligence Bureau which is really supposed to be something that's out there spying for the country supposedly, anyway the Intelligence Bureau has come out with a report saying that social movements and NGOs that have been fighting about the concerns of people who are displaced by projects and those who are worried about the impact of nuclear projects, the environmental impacts and so on, they are essentially antinational, against national security interests, and amazingly they've come up with a figure saying they're losing the country 3% of GDP per year. Now, the fact that an intelligence bureau can come out with a report like this is mindboggling and it's also deeply worrying because it suggests that the government can now use this as a way of getting after these NGOs and social movements and preventing the kind of popular dissent that would force the government to respect human rights.

HM Jessica, the World Bank, this is kind of your starter for 10 isn't it, because I know that Human Rights Watch published a report last year about what the World Bank should be doing about human rights. Just give me some specifics about where they're falling down now.

JE Sure. So the World Bank has typically seen human rights as beyond its purview which is incredibly troubling considering it is a leading development agency. I agree with Jayati that the World Bank finance as compared to other finance is decreasing in proportion and that governments, whether they be governments that are receiving donor aid or governments that are giving them, are also incredibly important actors when it comes to realising human rights. But the World Bank itself is not held accountable to international human rights standards, instead it creates its own policies that are internal and holds itself accountable to those policies. Therefore it's operating outside of the international human rights framework which is incredibly problematic.

To give you one very recent example, just today Human Rights Watch has published a report in Tajikistan on resettlements linked to the Rogun Dam which is set to be the highest dam in the world. The World Bank has provided financing, looking at both the environmental and the social impacts of this dam, but unfortunately, although the World Bank looks at the degree to which international environmental and water laws are being complied with it doesn't even touch on international human rights law, including the obligations of the Tajik government that the government itself has signed up to.
HM What about people who say, well you have to strike a balance, what's the greater good, is it to have these considerations about human rights or is it to get money to places where people desperately need that money, and that maybe too much concentration on human rights is a bit of a luxury?

JE I think that's creating a false dichotomy here. The international financial institutions and donors can work with governments to create development projects which do respect human rights. They can ensure that communities have the opportunity to meaningfully participate in crafting their own development agendas and then they can work with those communities and with the governments to finance them. It's not a question of whether we go in or not, it's a question of how the international institutions can use their own leverage to support the human rights of people within developing countries.

HM Now of course, Jayati Ghosh, the World Bank may not be the only player in town for long because, of course, China has announced plans to launch a global development institution to rival the World Bank. How, if at all, do you think that will change the dynamic?

JG I think it will change the dynamic in an important way in that in fact the World Bank has been less significant in all development investment and infrastructure investment now for several decades. But we haven't really had significant expansion of the regional banks and the Asian Development Bank really hasn't stepped up to the plate as required. So if the Chinese are actually willing to put their money where their mouth is and dramatically increase this kind of funding it will definitely have an impact. But I would like to highlight another player who I think is being ignored in this, most development investment, so-called, today is in private hands, it's by multinational companies, and this is part of a broader policy stance that has been actively encouraged by the multilateral institutions themselves and by the WTO and others, and we are ignoring the impact that this kind of investment has on human rights. We now have increasing numbers of cases where you have multinational companies that have actually trampled on the rights of local communities and are able to get away with it because of either bilateral investment treaties or regional trade agreements that include investment chapters that effectively protect them through the investor protection clauses, or simply by the operation of US courts which has actually dramatically altered the power balance and limited the ability even when governments want to ensure the realisation of human rights.

HM So Jessica, corporations play a big role here. Do you think we should be doing more to regulate what they do?

JE Absolutely. And actually we have an opportunity at the moment to do just that. The post-2015 agenda on development is currently being negotiated and this provides an opportunity to finally bring into the round corporate accountability. There is a draft goal eight which is currently out there of the sustainable development goals and one way that we can massively improve this goal which is directed at promoting strong inclusive and sustainable economic growth and decent work for all, is by including in it a commitment to introduce mandatory requirements on corporations to undertake human rights due diligence around their work and publicly record on their human rights, social and environment impacts, as well as payments that they make to domestic or foreign governments which is essential to counter corruption.

HM Okay, we've talked a lot in the past few minutes about the World Bank, I should say that we did ask the World Bank for a contribution but they weren't able to give us one for this podcast, but Jayati, let me ask you, do you think, they do a lot in this area obviously and face a lot of criticism, is that fair?

JG No, I think it's certainly fair but I think they shouldn't be the only targets of criticism, I think there's a lot that the World Bank does which is really quite wrong and that they should be much more accountable and responsive to the criticism, but really as I mentioned earlier they are not the big players any more; the big players are the rules that are set up by the international treaties and the multinational corporations, who as Jessica mentioned are really currently not legally accountable at all. So I think we need to take much more cognizance of the fact that we have a bit of a free for all globally in terms of the lack of power of the human rights agenda relative to the investor protection agenda, and we need to rectify that imbalance.

HM Okay, well thank you both, that's all that we have time for on that bit of our debate. But thanks to Jayati Ghosh, Professor of Economics at Nehru University, Delhi, and to Jessica Evans of Human Rights Watch, a senior researcher in their Business and Human Rights division, for their contributions. This edition of the Global development podcast was produced by Matt Hill, assisted by Mark Anderson. Don't forget, you can have your say at theguardian.com/global-development. Just click on the link and voilà, you'll get your podcast. Thank you for listening, I hope it was illuminating, my name's Hugh Muir. Until next time, goodbye.