Misuse of The Notary's Right to Reject in Investigation of Criminal Cases Regarding Deeds He Made
Abstract
Abstract. Notaries have an important role in ensuring legal certainty through the creation of authentic deeds. However, in practice, the right of denial held by notaries often becomes an obstacle in the investigation of criminal cases involving deeds they have made. This right aims to protect the confidentiality of the position and the interests of the client, but on the other hand, it can hinder the law enforcement process when the notary refuses to comply with the investigator's summons. This study uses a normative legal approach, meaning that the study was conducted using a literature study approach and a statute approach. Data type the type of data uses secondary data obtained from a literature study. The analysis in this study is prescriptive. The results of this study indicate that although notaries are given legal protection to maintain their professional independence, there is tension between the notary's legal obligation to comply with investigators' summons and the right to maintain the confidentiality of documents created. Failure to comply with investigators' summons can result in administrative or criminal sanctions, as well as hinder investigations and law enforcement. To maintain a balance between the protection of the notary profession and law enforcement, there needs to be strengthening of professional supervision and revision of regulations related to investigation procedures for notary documents. This study also highlights the importance of ongoing education for notaries regarding their rights and obligations, as well as training for investigators to understand the limitations of their authority in handling notary documents, in order to avoid abuse of authority and maintain the principle of due process of law.
Keywords: Authentic Deed; Criminal Investigation; Notary; Right of Refusal
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Habib Adjie. (2009).Meneropong Khazanah Notaris dan PPAT Indonesia (Kumpulan Tulisan TentangNotaris dan PPAT. Bandung: PT Citra Aditya Bakti
Heriyanti. (2016). Perlindungan Hukum Notaris Yang Melakukan Tindak Pidana. Jurnal Yustisia Vol. 5 No. 2, 2016, hal. 328.
Ira Koesoemawati dan Yunirman Rijan. (2009). Ke Notaris. Jakarta: Raih Asa Sukses
Kohar. (2003). Notaris Dalam Praktek Hukum. Bandung: Alumni
Lumban Tobing. (1983). Peraturan Jabatan Notaris. Jakarta: Erlangga
Nur Cahyanti, Budi Raharjo, Sri Endah Wahyuningsih. (2018) “Sanksi Terhadap Notaris yang melakukan Tindak Pidana Menurut Peraturan Perundang Undangan di Indonesia”, dalam Jurnal Akta Vol 5 No 1 hal. 288
Pasal 1 Butir 1, Pasal 1 Ayat 6, Pasal 6Ayat 2, Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana
R. Soesilo. (1993). Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP) serta Komentar-Komentarnya Lengkap Pasal Demi Pasal. Politea: Bogor.
Sjaifurrachman dan Habib Adjie.(2011). Aspek Pertanggungjawaban Notaris dalam Pembuatan Akta. Bandung: Mandar Maju.
Tan Thong Kie. (2007). Studi Notariat dan Serba-Serbi Praktek Notaris. Jakarta: Ichtiar Baru Van Hoeve
Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014, Pasal 66 ayat (1).
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Editorial Office: TABELLIUS: Journal of Law Room 2nd Floor Imam As Syafei Building Faculty of Law Universitas Islam Sultan Agung. Jln. Kaligawe KM. 4, Semarang City, Central Java, Indonesia. Phone +62 24 6583584 Fax +62 24 6582455
Email : tabelius@unissula.ac.id