Efforts on consumer?s empowerment in globalization and free-trade era is expected to deliver Indonesians consumers in becoming independent consumers so the position of either business actors and consumers has reach balance and no longer exist as the subject of enterprise actor?s object. To protect the general interest, government has giving guarantee and legal certainty on using measurement unit and the truth of measurement particularly on BDKT truth size.  Based on this, there were several question arise such as: First, how is the test procedures on BDKT which is done by Balai Kemetrologian Surabaya. Second, how is the effectivity of legal protection on consumers about the truth size of BDKT. Third, what is the settlement effort done by Balai Pelayanan Kemetrologian Surabaya to create legal protection for consumer if there are violation concerning the truth size of BDKT. This experiment is using sociologic juridical approach, data collection technique is interviews with respondent, documentation study by collecting data which obtained directly from the experimental sites, observation and questionnaire spread toward 25 respondent. Then it would descriptive qualitatively analyzed. Result of the experiment on 25 random consumers through questionnaire spread, 25 people has once bought BDKT, 14 people admitted not knowing the whereabouts of Balai Kemetrologian Surabaya and only 11 people knew that there is a governmental body who guarantee the truth size of BDKT which is Balai Pelayanan Kemetrologian.  The conclusions are legal protection implementation on consumer about the truth size of BDKT still ineffectively implemented. These can be seen from a lot of BDKT still didn?t fulfilling standard criteria as explained in article 22, 23 in Legal Metrology Laws, and there are still several prohibited act as explained in article 31 Legal Metrology Laws. There are also obstacles started with job range of Balai Kemetrologian Surabaya is still too vast, several limitations on human resources, fund, medium and infrastructure, and also represive act which is done by Sub-Office still didn?t optimal in relation with the truth size of BDKT. In this matters, settlement efforts which is done by Balai Kemetrologian Surabaya consist of two ways, that is, preventive efforts and repressive efforts, in this matter if there are violation, Balai Kemetrologian Surabaya should made a report about the form of violation toward Office of Trade and Industry (Dinas Perindustrian dan Perdagangan) which would be managed by Sub-Office as PPNS, official with the rights to do investigation of violation of Legal Metrology Laws. Therefore, Balai Pelayanan Kemetrologian Surabaya cannot work optimally if they didn?t have support from Metrology Sub-Office (Sub Dinas Metrologi). Suggestion, socialization needs to be improved toward more intense customer and there should be better cooperation between Balai Pelayanan Kemetrologian Surabaya with Metrology Sub-Office.


Keyword : Efektifitas, Perlindungan Hukum, BDKT


Related Link :  http://skripsi.umm.ac.id/files/disk1/322/jiptummpp-gdl-s1-2009-sandihanum-16082-PENDAHUL-N.pdf


Efektifitas; Perlindungan Hukum; BDKT; umm