Juridical Review of Executorial Confiscation Power after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18 / PUU-XVII / 2019 Against Act No. 42 of 1999 Regarding Fiduciary Guarantee

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30659/akta.v7i4.14104

Keywords:

Executorial Seizure, Constitutional Court Decision, Fiduciary Guarantee.

Abstract

The purpose of this research is uTo: 1) To determine the legal strength of the executorial confiscation of a fiduciary guarantee certificate against a debtor who is in default (in default) and does not want to voluntarily hand over the goods that are the object of fiduciary security and 2) To know the procedure for implementing the execution of a fiduciary guarantee certificate for debtors who are in default (default) After the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18 / PUU-XVII / 2019 and (3) To find out what weaknesses and solutions can be obtained from the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18 / PUU-XVII / 2019. The data used in this study are primary data, secondary data, and tertiary data that can support the assessment, which are then analyzed using the normative juridical method. Based on the results of data analysis, it is concluded that: 1) based on the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 18 / PUU-XVII / 2019 seizure of the execution of the fiduciary guarantee by the creditor mustdone when there is an agreement regarding the default and the debtor's willingness to hand over the object that becomes the object of fiduciary. 2) If there is no agreement regarding default and the debtor does not voluntarily submit the object of guarantee, then the procedure for executing the fiduciary guarantee is carried out the same as the execution of a court decision which has permanent legal force.

Author Biographies

  • Lupita Randawi, Sultan Agung Islamic University
    Student Master of Notary Law, Faculty of Law, Universitas Islam Sultan Agung Semarang,
  • Akhmad Khisni, Sultan Agung Islamic University
    Lecturer Master of Notary Law, Faculty of Law, Universitas Islam Sultan Agung Semarang
  • Amin Purnawan, Sultan Agung Islamic University
    Lecturer Master of Notary Law, Faculty of Law, Universitas Islam Sultan Agung Semarang

References

Asih, Indri Yunita. (2010). Perjanjian Kredit Dengan Jaminan Fidusia Atas Kendaraan Bermotor Yang Digadaikan Kepada Pihak Ketiga (Studi Kasus Pada BPR MAA Semarang). Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang.

Act Number 7 of 1992 which has been amended into Act Number 10 of 1998 concerning Banking

Published

2020-12-30