Notary's Responsibility for Criminal Acts of Corruption He Did as a General Official Study of Decision Number: 1673 PK/Pid.Sus/2024

Ihsan Adam Dewindra

Abstract


As a public official, a notary has the authority to create authentic deeds that have perfect evidentiary power. However, in practice, it is possible for notaries to be involved in criminal acts of corruption, either directly or indirectly, thus raising questions regarding the limits and forms of their legal accountability. This study aims to analyze the responsibility of notaries for criminal acts of corruption committed in their capacity as public officials and their legal implications. The research method used is normative juridical research with a statutory and conceptual approach. The data used are primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials that are analyzed qualitatively to obtain a comprehensive understanding of notary responsibility in the context of criminal acts of corruption. The results of the study indicate that notaries proven to have committed criminal acts of corruption can be held accountable under criminal, civil, and administrative laws. Criminal liability is imposed based on laws and regulations related to criminal acts of corruption, while civil liability relates to losses incurred, and administrative liability is in the form of sanctions from organizations or supervisory agencies.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Journals:

A. I. Samiya, 2021, “Notaris Sebagai Pelapor dalam Pencegahan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang”, Jurnal Juris, Vol. V, No. 2, 102

Anisa Anggit Arsanti dan Aju Putrijanti, 2024 , “Pertanggungjawaban Hukum terhadap PPAT yang Melakukan Tindak Pidana Korupsi di Bidang Perpajakan”, Notarius, Vol. 17 No. 2, 611.

Anisa Anggit Arsanti dan Aju Putrijanti, 2024, “Pertanggungjawaban Hukum terhadap PPAT yang Melakukan Tindak Pidana Korupsi di Bidang Perpajakan”, Notarius, Vol. 17 No. 2, 610

Jo Shien Nie et al., 2025, “Ketidaksinkronan Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Notaris dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi Kredit Perbankan dalam Perkara Nomor: 42/Pid.Sus-TPK/2022/PN Mdn”, Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat dan Riset Pendidikan, Vol. 4 No. 2, 12626

Jo Shien Nie et al., 2025, “Ketidaksinkronan Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Notaris dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi Kredit Perbankan dalam Perkara Nomor: 42/Pid.Sus-TPK/2022/PN Mdn”, Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat dan Riset Pendidikan, Vol. 4 No. 2, 12629.

M. Siti Nabila, 2022, “Tindak Pidana Korupsi yang Dilakukan oleh Notaris atas Akta yang Dikeluarkannya”, The Indonesian Journal of Legal Studies (TELJ), Vol. 3 No. 2, , 45

Nikson Rinaldi Sinaga dan Bambang Eko Turisno, 2024, “Tanggung Jawab Notaris Terhadap Covernote yang Dibuat Sebagai Pengganti Jaminan Atas Utang”, Notarius, Vol. 17 No. 2, 636.

Nikson Rinaldi Sinaga dan Bambang Eko Turisno, 2024, “Tanggung Jawab Notaris Terhadap Covernote yang Dibuat Sebagai Pengganti Jaminan Atas Utang”, Notarius, Vol. 17 No. 2, 636.

Nikson Rinaldi Sinaga dan Bambang Eko Turisno, 2024, “Tanggung Jawab Notaris Terhadap Covernote yang Dibuat Sebagai Pengganti Jaminan Atas Utang”, Notarius, Vol. 17 No. 2, 636

Nikson Rinaldi Sinaga dan Bambang Eko Turisno, 2024, “Tanggung Jawab Notaris Terhadap Covernote yang Dibuat Sebagai Pengganti Jaminan Atas Utang”, Notarius, Vol. 17 No. 2, 636

Books:

Herlien Budiono, 2015, Kumpulan Tulisan Hukum Perdata di Bidang Kenotariatan Buku Ketiga, PT Citra Aditya Bakti, Bandung.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.