Application of the Principle of Balance and Justice to Debtors Who Do Not Act in Good Faith Based on Law Number 37 of 2004 Concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Payment
Downloads
The development of the economy in Indonesia has an impact on the development and problems of commercial law. Along with the development of the times, the suspension of payment mechanism is often misused by debtors who want to postpone their debt payment obligations to their creditors in bad faith, such as: using fake debt agreements, involving fictitious creditors, filing several legal efforts, and various other methods with the aim of buying time. The author is interested in examining how the principle of balance and the principle of justice are applied to applications for suspension of payment made in bad faith in the judge’s decision and what efforts can be made by creditors regarding requests for suspension of payment made in bad faith?
This research uses a normative-empirical method, research specifications use analytical descriptive, data collection through informal interviews and documentation studies, and qualitative normative data analysis.
The results of the research conclude that the principle of balance and the principle of justice are no longer reflected in the judge’s decision regarding suspension of payment cases carried out in bad faith because they have created injustice and legal uncertainty, such as: repeated processing of legal action on the same case, delays in settling bankruptcy assets, delays in the execution process, and so on. Efforts that can be made include submitting an application to terminate the suspension of payment based on Article 255 paragraph (1) of Law 37 of 2004 and taking criminal legal steps.
Downloads
1. https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utang, accesed April 10, 2025.
2. Muljadi, Kartini. (2001). Penyelesaian Utang Piutang melalui Kepailitan dan PKPU. Bandung: Alumni, p. 10.
3. Anton Suyatno, R. (2012). Pemanfaatan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang: Sebagai Upaya Mencegah Kepailitan. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, p. 5.
4. Usman, Rachmadi. (2004). Dimensi Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama, p. 103.
5. Ihsan, Muhammad & Widyaningrum, Tuti. (2023). Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Tentang Terbukanya Upaya Hukum Kasasi Atas Putusan PKPU, Jurnal Ius Constituendum, Volume 8 Number 2, p. 337.
6. Tejo, E. S., Kurniati, Y., & RAS, H. (2024). Criminological Review of the Crime of Prostitution in a Group of Sexual Fantasy Performer on Social Media. Jurnal Poros Hukum Padjadjaran, 5(2), p. 284. https://doi.org/10.23920/jphp.v5i2.1511
7. https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/2-syarat-putusan-pkpu-bisa-diajukan-kasasi-lt6299dee06942a/, accesed April 10, 2025.
8. M. Sinaga, Syamsudin. (2012). Hukum Kepailitan Indonesia. Ciputat: PT Tatanusa, p. 17.
9. The recording of the creditors meeting of October 16, 2024 was recorded by the author.
10. https://www.jawapos.com/surabaya-raya/01687721/perusahaan-dipailitkan-pakai-kreditur-fiktif-klien-tidak-pernah-kenal-pengacara?page=2, accesed April 10, 2025.
11. https://realita.co/baca-15838-benhard-manurung-pastikan-pt-gusher-tarakan-tak-pernah-ajukan-pkpu, accesed April 11, 2025.
12. Muhaimin. (2020). Metode Penelitian Hukum. Mataram: Mataram University Press, p. 115.
13. Sugiyono. (2012). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D. Jakarta: Alfabeta, p. 29.
14. Mahendra Agatha, Ellen & Claretta, Dyva. (2023). Program Pendayagunaan Masyarakat Pada Kegiatan Lmi Innovation Weeks 2023, KARYA Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat, Volume 3 Number 1, p. 235.
15. Sapto Nugroho, Sigit (et. al.). (2020). Metodologi Riset Hukum. Palur: Oase Pustaka, p. 71.
16. Armia, Muhammad Siddiq. (2022). Penentuan Metode & Pendekatan Penelitian Hukum. Banda Aceh: Lembaga Kajian Konstitusi Indonesia, p. 8.
17. Fuady, Munir. (2014). Hukum Pailit dalam Teori dan Praktek. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, p. 175.
18. Sjahdeini, Sutan Remy. (2016). Sejarah, Asas, Dan Teori Hukum Kepailitan Memahami Undang-Undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang, Jakarta: PT Fajar Interpratama Mandiri, p. 411.
19. Remy Sjahdeini, Sutan. (2010). Hukum Kepailitan: Memahami Undang-Undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan (edisi keempat). Jakarta: PT Pustaka Utama Grafiti, p. 358.
20. http://www.hukumonline.com/stories/article/lt65d40cc3d0b3f/upaya-mencapai-homologasi-dalam-permohonan-pkpu/, accesed April 11, 2025.
21. https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/langkah-memperoleh-homologasi-dalam-kepailitan-dan-pkpu-lt6284db73c2800/, accesed April 13, 2025.
22. Wulandari. (2024). Kekuatan Pembuktian Akta Di Bawah Tangan Dalam Perkara Perdata, Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Legal Opinion, Volume 12 Number 2, p. 469.
23. Ihsan, Muhammad & Widyaningrum, Tuti. (2023). Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Tentang Terbukanya Upaya Hukum Kasasi Atas Putusan PKPU, Jurnal Ius Constituendum, Volume 8 Number 2, p. 339.
24. Farkhani (et. al.). (2018). Filsafat Hukum Paradigma Modernisme Menuju Post Modernise. Solo: Kafilah Publishing, p. 74.
25. Puspita Sari, Eva & Kongres, Evi. (2023). Kepastian Hukum Terhadap Proses PKPU Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 23/PUU-XIX/2021, Jurnal Hukum Magnum Opus, Volume 6 Number 1, p. 3.
26. Machmudin, Dudu Duswara. (2017). Pengantar Ilmu Hukum Sebuah Sketsa. Bandung: Refika Aditama, p.68.
27. Gede Atmadja, Dewa. (2018). Asas-Asas Hukum Dalam Sistem Hukum, Kertha Wicaksana, Volume 12 Number 2, p. 146.
28. Van Erits Kapitan, Rian & Cristian Rafael, Tontji. (2020). Penerapan Asas Contra Legem Oleh Hakim Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Jurnal Spektrum Hukum, Volume 17 Number 1, p. 139.
29. Aprita, Serlika & Adhitya, Rio. (2019). Penerapan “Asas Keadilan” Dalam Hukum Kepailitan Sebagai Perwujudan Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Debitor, Jurnal Hukum Media Bhakti, Volume 3 Number 1, p. 54.
30. M. Wantu, Fence. (2007). Antinomi Dalam Penegakan Hukum Oleh Hakim, Jurnal Berkala Mimbar Hukum, Volume 19 Number 3, Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada, p. 485.
31. Aprita, Serlika & Adhitya, Rio. (2020). Filsafat Hukum. Depok: RajaGrafindo Persada, p. 367.
32. Huijbers, Theo. (2018). Filsafat Hukum dalam Lintasan Sejarah. Yogyakarta: Penerbit PT Kanisius, p. 163.
33. Sujana, Hanifudin (et. al.). (2013). Kajian Hukum Asas Itikad Baik Dalam Perjanjian Jual-Beli Benda Bergerak, Artikel Ilmiah Hasil Penelitian Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum Universitas Jember, p. hlm. 7.
34. Mardianto, Agus. (2010). Penghapusan pendaftaran merek berdasarkan gugatan Pihak Ketiga, Jurnal Dinamika Hukum, Volume 10 Number 1, p. 47.
35. Ariyanto. (2016). Perbandingan Asas Iktikad Baik: Dalam Perjanjian Menurut Sistem Hukum Civil Law (Eropa Continental) Dan Common Law (Anglosaxon), Jurnal Komunikasi Hukum, Volume 2 Number 2, p. 123.
36. Azizah, Noor. (2022). Hukum Kepailitan Memahami Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan. Banjarmasin: Universitas Islam Kalimantan Muhammad Arsyad Al-Banjari, p. 90.
37. Riansyah, Ahmad. (2022). Penerapan Asas Itikad Baik Dalam Pelaksanaan Perjanjian Jual Beli Tanah, Consensus: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Volume 1 Number 2, p. 44.
38. https://law.ui.ac.id/promosi-doktor-robert-prinsip-itikad-baik-dalam-pemeriksaan-permohonan-kepailitan-dan-penundan-kewajiban-pembayaran-utang-di-indonesia/, accesed April 15, 2025.
39. Sari, Indah. (2020). Perbuatan Melawan Hukum (PMH) dalam Hukum Pidana dan Hukum Perdata, Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Dirgantara, Volume 11 Number 1, p. 54.
Copyright (c) 2025 Eko Susanto Tejo, Prof. Dr. Hernawati RAS, Dr. Yeti Kurniati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
