Tinjauan yuridis pembebanan dan eksekusi jaminan fidusia pada lembaga keuangan bukan bank menurut putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019

Sari, Juwita Ratna (2020) Tinjauan yuridis pembebanan dan eksekusi jaminan fidusia pada lembaga keuangan bukan bank menurut putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019. Masters thesis, Universitas Pelita Harapan.

	Text (Title) ilovepdf_merged (20).pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (976kB)
Preview	Text (Abstract) Abstract Juwita_watermark.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (426kB) | Preview
Preview	Text (ToC) ToC Juwita_watermark.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (623kB) | Preview
Preview	Text (Chapter 1) Chapter 1 Juwita.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (1MB) | Preview
	Text (Chapter 2) Chapter 2 Juwita.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (3MB)
	Text (Chapter 3) Chapter 3 Juwita.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (623kB)
	Text (Chapter 4) Chapter 4 Juwita.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (3MB)
	Text (Chapter 5) Chapter 5 Juwita.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (289kB)
Preview	Text (Bibliography) Bibliography Juwita.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (357kB) | Preview

Abstract

Adanya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019, apabila debitur melakukan wanprestasi dan menolak untuk menyerahkan objek jaminan fidusianya, maka kreditur sebagai pemegang jaminan fidusia, tidak dapat segera melakukan eksekusi, tetapi harus melalui mekanisme dan prosedur hukum dalam pelaksanaan eksekusi putusan pengadilan yang telah berkekuatan hukum tetap. Hal ini tentunya akan mereduksi Pasal 15 Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia, yang mengatur sertifikat jaminan fidusiamempunyai kekuatan eksekutorial. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah bagaimana pengaturan pemberian pembebanan jaminan fidusia di Indonesia berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia? Bagaimana kepastian hukum bagi kreditur yang memegang jaminan fidusia setelah terbitnya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU- XVII/2019? Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan pengumpulan data yang digunakan adalah data sekunder. Hasil dari penelitian ini bahwa putusan MK Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 tidak mengesampingkan Pasal 15 ayat (2) memperjelas karena dalam undang undang jaminan Fidusia no 42 tahun 1999 tidak mengatur kedudukan debitur apabila terjadi Wanprestasi atau cedera janji. Hingga apabila debitur Wanprestasi maka undang undang jaminan Fidusia tidaklah memberi pengaturan mengenai debiitur. Putusan MK Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 memberikan penjelasan bahwa kekuatan hukum antara debitur dan kreditur menjadi jelas dan kedudukannya sama dikarenakan, pihak kreditur tidak perlu melakukan penarikan melalui debt collector lagi melainkan bisa langsung ke pengadilan negeri namun harus melalui proses untuk membayar seorang pengacara. Dari Sisi debitur terlindungi dalam hal debitur tidak perlu merasa takut akan bertemu dengan debt collector maupun pihak ke 3 yang diutus untuk mengambil barang jaminan Fidusia. / Constitutional Court Decision Number 18 / PUU-XVII / 2019, if the debtor carries out a default and refuses to hand over his fiduciary object, the creditor as a fiduciary guarantee holder cannot execute immediately, but must go through legal mechanisms and procedures in the execution of the court decision. which has permanent legal force. This will certainly reduce Article 15 of Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees, which regulates fiduciary guarantees as having executive power. The problem in this study is how to regulate the provision of fiduciary guarantees in Indonesia based on Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees? What is the legal certainty for creditors who hold fiduciary guarantees after the issuance of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18 / PUU-XVII / 2019? This study uses normative juridical methods with the data collection used is secondary data. The results of this study that the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 18 / PUU-XVII / 2019 does not rule out Article 15 paragraph (2) clarifies because in the Fiduciary guarantee law no 42 of 1999 does not regulate the position of the debtor in the event of default or contractual injury. Until if the debtor defaults, the Fiduciary Guarantee Act does not provide provisions regarding debtors. Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 18 / PUU-XVII / 2019 provides an explanation that the legal force between the debtor and creditor becomes clear and the position is the same because, the creditor does not need to make withdrawals through the debt collector anymore but can go directly to the district court but must go through a process to pay a lawyer. In terms of the debtor is protected in the case that the debtor does not need to be afraid of meeting the debt collector or the third party sent to take Fiduciary collateral.

Actions (login required)

View Item