Legal Certainty For An Object That Is A Fiduciary Guarantee Which Has Not Been Removed After The Debt Is Removed

Fitri Pujianti Utami, Nanang Sri Darmadi, Anis Mashdurohatun

Abstract


            The relationship between creditors and debtors in the business world requires legal certainty, which is realized through collateral instruments, one of which is fiduciary collateral. Although Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Collateral and Government Regulation No. 21 of 2015 stipulate the obligation to write off debts after debt repayment, practice shows that many collateral items are not written off, so the object remains listed as collateral. TypeThis research is normative juridical, using a conceptual juridical approach. The data used include primary, secondary, and non-legal data by collecting data through literature and analyzing it using prescriptive analysis to describe and evaluate the implementation of fiduciary roya. The procedure for the removal (roya) of fiduciary collateral is carried out by the creditor after the debtor has fully paid their obligations by submitting an application to the Fiduciary Registration Office, which then issues a Roya Certificate. However, because the removal is not automatic, differences often arise between the material and administrative removal of fiduciary collateral. This situation creates legal uncertainty, where the debtor cannot reuse the collateral, new creditors lose certainty, and potentially give rise to disputes. The roya mechanism in the Fiduciary Collateral Law needs to be strengthened with clear derivative regulations regarding time limits and sanctions for creditors who fail to comply, to prevent re-fiduciary collateral and provide legal certainty. System improvements can also be achieved through digitization and data integration between institutions, mandatory verification by notaries, and strengthening fiduciary certificates as executorial titles to more effectively protect creditors and debtors.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Journals:

Hutagaol, Eva Rita, (2013), Akibat Hukum Bila Sertifikat Jaminan Fidusia Tidak di Roya (Studi Pada Kementrian Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia di Pontianak Kalimantan Barat), Jurnal Notarius, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, Vol. 4 No 1.

Ulfa, Maria dan Wisnaeni, Fifiana, (2025), Peran Notaris dalam Transaksi Fidusia untuk Menjamin Kepastian dan Perlindungan Hukum, Jurnal Notarius, Universitas Diponegoro, Vol. 18 No. 2.

Wardhani, Sang Ayu Made Ary Kusuma, (2025), Pelaksannaan Penghapusan (Roya) Jaminan Fidusia Setelah Kredit Lunas, Jurnal Kerta Dyatmika, Denpasar, Vol. 22 No. 1.

Nugraheni, Laksana Arum, (2017), Tanggung Jawab Hukum Notaris dalam Pendaftaran Jaminan Fidusia Secara Elektronik, Jurnal Hukum, Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta, Vol. 3 No. 1.

Books:

Fajar, Mukti dan Achmad, Yulianto, (2010), Dualisme Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Khoidin, M., (2017), Hukum Jaminan (Hak-hal Jaminan, Hak Tanggungan, dan Eksekusi Hak Tnggungan), Surabaya: Laksbang Yustitia.

Satrio, J., 2005, Hukum Jaminan: Hak Jaminan Kebendaan Fidusia, Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Sutarno, (2005), Aspek-Aspek Hukum Perkreditan Pada Bank, Bandung: Alfabeta.

Witanto, D. Y., (2015), Hukum Jaminan Fidusia Dalam Perjanjian Konsumen, Bandung: CV. Mandar Maji.

Internet:

https://ahu.go.id/pencarian/fidusia#:~:text=Data-Fidusia-yang-dapat-diakses,sejak-tanggal-5-maret-2013

https://panduan.ahu.go.id/doku.php?id=penghapusan

https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/jaminan-fidusia--perkembangan-dan-masalahnya-lt615279db01e93/

Interview:

Interview with Bapak Dodo Warda, Direktur Utama Perumda BPR Kuningan, accessed on 15 August 2025.


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

Phone: 024-6583584 (574)
Email : tabelius@unissula.ac.id