DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.55.2.2026.348-371

COMMANDITAIRE VENNOOTSCHAP AS SUBJECT OF BUILDING RIGHTS TITLE: ISSUES WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF LEGAL NORMATIVITY?

*Rian Saputra  -  Senior External Research Fellow, Faculty of Law and International Relations, Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Malaysia
Dora Kusumastuti  -  Faculty of Law, Universitas Slamet Riyadi, Indonesia
Nilam Firmandayu  -  Faculty of Law, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia
Tiara Tiolince  -  Master’s Program in Notary Law, Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Indonesia
Zepiko Ferera  -  Undergraduate Law Student, Faculty of Law, Universitas Slamet Riyadi, Indonesia
Jose Gama Santos  -  Faculty of Law, Universidade Dili, Timor-Leste
Open Access Copyright (c) 2026 Masalah-Masalah Hukum under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0.

Citation Format:
Abstract

The issuance of Circular Letter of the Minister of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/National Land Agency No. 2/SE-HT.02.01/VI/2019 concerning the granting of Building Use Rights to Commanditaire Vennootschap (CV) raises legal concerns regarding the limits of administrative discretion, the principle of legality, and the hierarchy of legal norms in Indonesian land law. The Circular Letter was introduced to facilitate investment by allowing CVs to obtain Building Use Rights; however, this policy potentially conflicts with Law No. 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Agrarian Principles and Government Regulation No. 18 of 2021, which limit the holders of Building Use Rights to Indonesian citizens and legal entities established under Indonesian law. This study examines the legal validity of the Circular Letter as an administrative policy instrument and analyses whether the recognition of CVs as holders of Building Use Rights represents a lawful exercise of governmental discretion. The study focuses on the concept of freies Ermessen, the requirements for exercising discretion under Law No. 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration, and the application of the General Principles of Good Governance. The findings demonstrate that administrative discretion does not grant unlimited authority to government officials to create new legal subjects or modify rights established by higher-ranking regulations. The Circular Letter exceeds the legitimate scope of discretion because it substantively expands the category of Building Use Rights holders without explicit statutory authority. Although the policy objective of facilitating investment constitutes a legitimate governmental interest, such objective cannot override the principle of legality and legal certainty. This study concludes that the recognition of CVs as holders of Building Use Rights requires comprehensive legal reform rather than administrative policy. Amendments to the Basic Agrarian Law and related regulations are necessary to establish a clear legal basis while maintaining consistency, accountability, and certainty within the Indonesian land law system.

Fulltext View|Download Email colleagues
Keywords: Administrative Discretion; Circular Letter; Building Use Rights; Commanditaire Vennootschap; Land Law Reform

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Articles
Language : EN
Most cited articles
PERLINDUNGAN EKSPRESI BUDAYA TRADISIONAL DALAM SISTEM HUKUM KEKAYAAN INTELEKTUAL PRINSIP MOST FAVOURED NATIONS DAN PENGECUALIANNYA DALAM WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION (WTO) UPAYA PERLINDUNGAN HAK ASASI MANUSIA DALAM PEMBINAAN NARAPIDANA ANAK (STUDI DI LEMBAGA PEMASYARAKATAN KLAS II B ANAK PONTIANAK) IMPLEMENTASI DIVERSI TERHADAP ANAK YANG BERHADAPAN DENGAN HUKUM (STUDI KASUS DI PULAU LOMBOK) PRISMATIKA HUKUM SEBAGAI DASAR PEMBANGUNAN HUKUM DI INDONESIA BERDASARKAN PANCASILA (Kajian terhadap Hukum Kekayaan Intelektual) More cited articles
  1. Abdurrahman, A., Santoso, B., & Priyono, E. A. (2026). Extended Land-Tenure Rights in Nusantara: A Legal Analysis of Regulatory Inconsistency and Agrarian Justice. Jurnal Hukum Progresif, 14(2), 421–458. https://doi.org/10.14710/jhp.14.2.421-458
  2. Abhimantara, I. B. (2019). Kedudukan Persekutuan Komanditer (Commanditaire Venootschap) Sebagai Corporate Guarantee. Notaire, 2(3), 359. https://doi.org/10.20473/ntr.v2i3.16227
  3. Akmal, D. U. (2021). Penataan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Sebagai Upaya Penguatan Sistem Hukum di Indonesia. Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia, 18(3), 296–308. https://doi.org/10.54629/jli.v18i3.761
  4. Alexander, J., & Richmond, S. A. (2007). Administrative Discretion. The American Review of Public Administration, 37(1), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074006287919
  5. Anggono, B. D. (2016). The Tenure Arrangement of Primary Constitutional Organ Leaders in Indonesian Constitutional System. Constitutional Review, 2(1), 29-56. https://doi.org/10.31078/consrev212
  6. Ardani, M. N., Yusriyadi, Y., & Silviana, A. (2024). Sustainable Environmental Management in Nusantara Capital City: Legal Perspectives and Best Practices. Diponegoro Law Review, 9(2), 167–185. https://doi.org/10.14710/dilrev.9.2.2024.167-185
  7. Ardhira, A. Y., & Anand, G. (2018). Itikad Baik dalam Proses Mediasi Perkara Perdata di Pengadilan. Media Iuris, 1(2), 200-214. https://doi.org/10.20473/mi.v1i2.8821
  8. Asshiddiqie, J. (2006). Perihal Undang-Undang. Konstitusi Press
  9. Austin, J. (1832). The Province of Jurisprudence Determined. John Murray
  10. Baber, W. F. (2011). Administrative Law and Discursive Democracy: Toward a Comparative Perspective. International Journal of Public Administration, 34(1–2), 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2011.536090
  11. Basah, S. (1985). Eksistensi dan Tolok Ukur Badan Peradilan Administrasi Negara. Alumni
  12. Basuki, A., Zaid, M., & Mohamed Musa, A. A. (2023). Establishing Ecological Justice in the Governance of Land Inventory, Ownership, and Utilisation in Indonesia. Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice, 1(2), 137–154. https://doi.org/10.62264/jlej.v1i2.12
  13. Batubara, S. C., Kotan, G. M. J., & Hartono, R. A. (2019). Persekutuan Komanditer (Commanditaire Venootschap) Sebagai Pemegang Hak Guna Bangunan. Notaire, 2(3), 405-420. https://doi.org/10.20473/ntr.v2i3.16216
  14. Bertelli, A. M., Falletti, V., & Cannas, S. (2025). Authorized Discretion: The Democratic Essentials of Governance in the European Union. Governance, 38(3), e70029. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.70029
  15. Biya, C. I. B. P., & Rudy, D. G. (2020). Persekutuan Komanditer Sebagai Subjek Pemegang Hak Guna Bangunan Berdasarkan Surat Edaran Menteri ATR/BPN Nomor 2/SE-HT.02.01/VI/2019. Acta Comitas, 5(1), 14-25. https://doi.org/10.24843/AC.2020.v05.i01.p02
  16. Brik, A. B. (2026). Policy Design Under Institutional Constraint: Discretion, Targeting, and Governance Infrastructure. Policy Design and Practice, 9(3), 362–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2026.2675154
  17. Carelli, D., & Peters, B. G. (2024). Autonomy by Decree: How Administrative Law Shapes Bureaucratic Autonomy in Four Administrative Traditions. Administration & Society, 56(5), 683–703. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997241244500
  18. Cartier, G. (2009). Administrative Discretion and the Spirit of Legality: From Theory to Practice. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 24(3), 313–335. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0829320100010061
  19. Castro Fuentes, C. (2023). El Control Judicial de la Discrecionalidad Administrativa. Revista Chilena de Derecho y Ciencia Política, 14(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.7770/rchdcp-v14n1-art337
  20. Disantara, F. P. (2020). The Legitimacy of Circular Letter in Handling COVID-19 Pandemic. Rechtsidee, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.21070/jihr.2020.6.645
  21. Dyzenhaus, D., Hunt, M., & Taggart, M. (2001). The Principle of Legality in Administrative Law: Internationalisation as Constitutionalisation. Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal, 1(1), 5–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2001.11421382
  22. Enqvist, L., & Naarttijärvi, M. (2023). Discretion, Automation, and Proportionality. In The Rule of Law and Automated Decision-Making (pp. 147–178). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30142-1_7
  23. Fathoni, M. Y., & Vasalo, A. F. (2023). Establishment of Land Court in Indonesia: An Effort to Realise Justice Based on Pancasila. Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice, 1(2), 86–104. https://doi.org/10.62264/jlej.v1i2.6
  24. Firman, T. (2004). Major Issues in Indonesia’s Urban Land Development. Land Use Policy, 21(4), 347–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2003.04.002
  25. Friedman, L. M. (2015). Law: Change and Evolution. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 565–569). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.86060-2
  26. Fuad, F., Tardjono, H., Machmud, A., Rohayah, N., & Maghucu, P. (2023). Ownership of Land: Legal Philosophy and Culture Analysis of Land Property Rights. Jurnal Media Hukum, 30(2), 98–116. https://doi.org/10.18196/jmh.v30i2.18264
  27. Fuller, L. L. (1969). The Morality of Law. Yale University Press
  28. Gilbert, J. (2013). Land Rights as Human Rights: The Case for a Specific Right to Land. SUR - International Journal on Human Rights, 18, 115–135. https://sur.conectas.org/en/land-rights-human-rights/
  29. Gonschorek, G. J. (2021). Subnational Favoritism in Development Grant Allocations: Empirical Evidence from Decentralized Indonesia. World Development, 139, 105299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105299
  30. Gonschorek, G. J., Schulze, G. G., & Sjahrir, B. S. (2018). To the Ones in Need or the Ones You Need? The Political Economy of Central Discretionary Grants − Empirical Evidence from Indonesia. European Journal of Political Economy, 54, 240–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2018.04.003
  31. Hadna, A. H., Listyaningsih, U., & Ihwanudin, I. (2022). To What Extent Have Street-Level Bureaucrats Used Their Discretionary Powers During The COVID-19 Pandemic in Indonesia? International Journal of Public Sector Management, 35(7), 806–820. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-12-2021-0272
  32. Hamidi, J. (1999). Penerapan Asas-Asas Umum Penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan yang Layak (AAUPB) di Lingkungan Peradilan Administrasi Indonesia. Citra Aditya Bakti
  33. Hanum, W. N., Ha, T. T. D., & Firmandayu, N. (2024). Eliminating Ecological Damage in Geothermal Energy Extraction: Fulfillment of Ecological Rights by Proposing Permits Standardization. Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice, 2(2), 205–228. https://doi.org/10.62264/jlej.v2i2.105
  34. Hanum, W. N., & Zaman, M. N. U. (2024). Existence of Human Rights Protection in Land and Mining Conflicts: Evidence from Indonesia. Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice, 2(3), 285–306. https://doi.org/10.62264/jlej.v2i3.107
  35. Harada, H. (2024). Constitutional State and Public Administration. In K. Agata, H. Inatsugu, & H. Shiroyama (Eds.), Public Administration in Japan (pp. 17–33). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-58610-1_2
  36. Hartanto, P., Ricky, R., & Gunawan, V. A. (2025). Using Indonesian Corruption Law for Eradicating the Yogyakarta Sultanate Land Mafia: A Legal Formulation Study. Indonesian Journal of Crime and Criminal Justice, 1(1), 23–53. https://doi.org/10.62264/ijccj.v1i1.122
  37. HR, R. (2014). Hukum Adminitrasi Negara. PT. Raja Gravindo Persada
  38. Hupe, P. (2025). Discretion in Public Policy. In M. van Gerven, C. Rothmayr Allison, & K. Schubert (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Public Policy (pp. 1–7). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90434-0_112-1
  39. Juwita, R. (2018). Good Governance and Anti-Corruption: Responsibility to Protect Universal Health Care in Indonesia. Hasanuddin Law Review, 4(2), 162-180. https://doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v4i2.1424
  40. Kelsen, H. (1941). The Pure Theory of Law and Analytical Jurisprudence. Harvard Law Review, 55(1), 44-70. https://doi.org/10.2307/1334739
  41. Kelsen, H. (1949). General Theory of Law and State. Harvard University Press
  42. Kravchuk, R. S. (1991). Public Administration and the Rule of Law. International Journal of Public Administration, 14(3), 265–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900699108524718
  43. Kusumastuti, D., Saputra, R., & Firmandayu, N. (2025). Good Faith in the United States’ International Reciprocal Tariff Agreements: Safeguarding Indonesian Domestic Products. Substantive Justice International Journal of Law, 8(2), 163-183. https://doi.org/10.56087/substantivejustice.v8i2.512
  44. La Ode Ghondohi, H.M. Said KArim, Muhadar, M., Ali Rahman, & Maratovna, Y. A. (2025). Asset Recovery from Mining Corruption: Rationality, Urgency, and Challenges for Environmental Restoration. Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice, 3(2), 446–475. https://doi.org/10.62264/jlej.v3i2.172
  45. Lim, H.-H. (2007). Improving Administrative Performance in Malaysia: The More Difficult Next Steps in Reform. Policy and Society, 26(2), 33–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1449-4035(07)70107-8
  46. Luthan, S. (2012). Dialektika Hukum dan Moral dalam Perspektif Filsafat Hukum. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, 19(4), 506–523. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol19.iss4.art2
  47. Marbun, SF., & MD, Moh. M. (2009). Pokok-Pokok Hukum Administrasi Negara. Liberty
  48. Matipa, B. (2020). Administration and Discretion. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance (pp. 1–4). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3911-1
  49. McCann, S. (2023). Discretion in the Automated Administrative State. Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence, 36(1), 171–194. https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2022.25
  50. McHarg, A. (2017). Administrative Discretion, Administrative Rule-making, and Judicial Review. Current Legal Problems, 70(1), 267–303. https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/cux011
  51. Montjoy, R. S., & O’Toole, L. J. (1979). Toward a Theory of Policy Implementation: An Organizational Perspective. Public Administration Review, 39(5), 465–476. https://doi.org/10.2307/3109921
  52. Muhshi, A. (2018). Pemenuhan Hak atas Informasi Publik sebagai Tanggung Jawab Negara dalam Mewujudkan Good Governance. Lentera Hukum, 5(1), 59-76. https://doi.org/10.19184/ejlh.v5i1.7284
  53. Nalle, V. I. W. (2018). The Scope of Discretion in Government Administration Law: Constitutional or Unconstitutional? Hasanuddin Law Review, 4(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v4i1.1316
  54. Nurudin, A. (2016). Diskresi Yudisial: Antara Keadilan dan Pencitraan. Masalah-Masalah Hukum, 45(1), 18-24. https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.45.1.2016.18-24
  55. Ong, B. J. (2021). The Unmeritorious ‘Legality’/‘Merits’ Distinction in Singapore Administrative Law. Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 16(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1017/asjcl.2021.10
  56. Paar-Jakli, G., Schreckhise, W. D., & Chand, D. E. (2024). Administrative Discretion Through Changing Presidencies and Political Polarization: Reflection on the Rise, Fall, and Rise of Federal-Local Immigration Partnerships in the U.S. International Journal of Public Administration, 47(14), 1001–1018. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2023.2242006
  57. Palmer, C. (2011). Property Rights and Liability for Deforestation Under REDD+: Implications For ‘Permanence’ in Policy Design. Ecological Economics, 70(4), 571–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.10.011
  58. Purbopranoto, K. (1975). Beberapa Catatan Hukum Tata Pemerintahan dan Peradilan Administrasi Negara. Alumni
  59. Rahmah, S., Jalil, H., & Kadir, M. Y. A. (2024). Legal Dilemma for Land Deed Officials in Transferring Land Title Within Agrarian Reform in Indonesia: A Study in Aceh Province. Samarah: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga dan Hukum Islam, 8(1), 556-578. https://doi.org/10.22373/sjhk.v8i1.16898
  60. Rahman, W., Sudarsono, S., Djatmika, P., Madjid, A., & Rehulina, R. (2024). Discretion of Government Officials Detrimental to State Finances: The Intersection Between Administrative Illegality and Criminal Illegality. Law Reform, 20(2), 230–249. https://doi.org/10.14710/lr.v20i2.64129
  61. Rini, N. S. (2018). Penyalahgunaan Kewenangan Administrasi Dalam Undang Undang Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure, 18(2), 257–274. https://doi.org/10.30641/dejure.2018.V18.257-274
  62. Rosenbloom, D. H. (2022). Administrative Law for Public Managers. Taylor & Francis
  63. Rosenbloom, D. H., O’Leary, R., & Chanin, J. (2017). Public Administration and Law. Routledge
  64. Ruiz-Tagle, S. (2024). From Discretion to Expert Judgement: Recasting Sedimented Concepts in Administrative Law. The Cambridge Law Journal, 83(3), 549–580. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197324000473
  65. Saefudin, Y., Rakhmatullah, B. R., Mohd Hassan, F., Ma’ruf, M., & Kurnianingsih, I. D. K. D. S. (2025). Empowering the Tri Hita Karana Paradigm for the Community: As an Effort to Prevent and Combat Environmental Crime. Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice, 3(2), 383–416. https://doi.org/10.62264/jlej.v3i2.166
  66. Samekto, F. X. A., & Natalis, A. (2024). Exploring the Grundnorm Dilemma: Can Pancasila be Considered the Grundnorm in the Context of “the Pure Theory of Law”? Journal of Philosophical Investigations, 18(48), 319–338. https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2024.62978.3843
  67. Saputra, R., Suwadi, P., Broto Laksito, F. H., & Santos, J. G. (2025). The Authority of Judges in Determining Suspects of Corruption: Rationality for the reform of Indonesia Criminal Justice in Corruption. Indonesian Journal of Crime and Criminal Justice, 1(2), 188–219. https://doi.org/10.62264/ijccj.v1i2.145
  68. Schmidt-Larios, D. (2026). Land Through Three Approaches. Agriculture and Human Values, 43(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-026-10853-1
  69. Sinaga, E. M. C., & Putri, M. C. (2020). Formulasi Legislasi Perlindungan Data Pribadi dalam Revolusi Industri 4.0. Jurnal Rechts Vinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, 9(2), 237-256. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v9i2.428
  70. Soeprapto, M. F. I. (2007). Ilmu Perundang-Undangan: Jenis, Fungsi, dan Materi Muatan. PT Kanisius
  71. Suhariyanto, B. (2018). Persinggungan Kewenangan Mengadili Penyalahgunaan Diskresi Antara Pengadilan TUN dan Pengadilan Tipikor / Interception of Justice Authority of Discretion Abuse Between Administration Court and Corruption Courts. Jurnal Hukum Dan Peradilan, 7(2), 213-236. https://doi.org/10.25216/jhp.7.2.2018.213-236
  72. Suparto, Adinda, F. A., Esanov, A. E., & Normurotovna, Z. E. (2024). Administrative Discretion in Indonesia & Netherland Administrative Court: Authorities and Regulations. Journal of Human Rights, Culture and Legal System, 4(1), 75–100. https://doi.org/10.53955/jhcls.v4i1.189
  73. Suparto, S., & Santos, J. G. (2024). Regional Spatial Regulation in Riau Province: Policy Formation Problems and Solutions. Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice, 2(2), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.62264/jlej.v2i2.104
  74. Surahno, S., Ruyadi, Y., & Nurdin, E. S. (2024). Internalisasi Nilai Pancasila dalam Praktik Diskresi Bagi Pengambilan Kebijakan. Masalah-Masalah Hukum, 53(3), 316–325. https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.53.3.2024.316-325
  75. Syam, F., Rahmi, E., & Arsyad, A. (2019). Eksistensi dan Konstruksi Yuridis Badan Usaha Milik Daerah Pasca Undang-Undang Pemerintahan Daerah Tahun 2014. Undang: Jurnal Hukum, 1(2), 295–322. https://doi.org/10.22437/ujh.1.2.295-322
  76. Theresia, E. (2022). Perkembangan dan Status Kedudukan Hukum atas Persekutuan Komanditer atau Commanditaire Vennootschap (CV) di Indonesia. Fiat Iustitia : Jurnal Hukum, 114–124. https://doi.org/10.54367/fiat.v3i1.2133
  77. Trubek, D. M. (2001). Law and Development. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 8443–8446). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/02910-7
  78. Tsukanov, N. (2023). Administrative Discretion: Some Ideas Based on the Results of the Discussion. Gosudarstvo i Pravo, (12), 214-218. https://doi.org/10.31857/S102694520029379-7
  79. Vese, D. (2025). Discretion and the Public Interest: The Case of the European Banking Authority. The Cambridge Law Journal, 84(2), 368–396. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197325100718
  80. Warren, K. F. (2018). Administrative Law in the Political System. Routledge
  81. White, B., Graham, C., & Savitri, L. (2023). Agrarian Movements and Rural Populism in Indonesia. Journal of Agrarian Change, 23(1), 68–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/joac.12506
  82. Wijaya, S. G., & Gunawan, M. M. (2025). Police Discretion on Terminating Corruption Investigations After Return State Financial Losses in Indonesia: Validity and Challenges. Indonesian Journal of Crime and Criminal Justice, 1(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.62264/ijccj.v1i1.124
  83. Zaelani, M. A., Rachmi Handayani, I. G. K. A., & Isharyanto, I. (2019). Asas Umum Pemerintahan Yang Baik Berlandaskan Pancasila Sebagai Dasar Penggunaan Diskresi. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, 26(3), 458–480. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol26.iss3.art2
  84. Zafimahatradraibe, J. A., Ranaivomanana, L. N. J., Rakotomahazo, C., Randriamanantsoa, B., Hartmann, A. C., & Todinanahary, G. G. B. (2025). Authority, Capacity, and Power to Govern: Three Marine Protected Areas Co-Managed by Resource Users and Non-Governmental Organizations. Marine Policy, 177, 106647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2025.106647
  85. Zamroni, M. (2019). General Principles of Good Governance in Indonesia: What are The Legal Bases? Varia Justicia, 15(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.31603/variajusticia.v15i1.2464
  86. Zhang, L. (2015). Operation of Chinese Venture Capital. In Chinas Venture Capital Market (pp. 45–52). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-85709-450-6.00003-6

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2026-10-23 01:55:01

No citation recorded.