Nowadays, Notary increasingly recognized by the society and necessary to make an apparatus written evidence that are authentic of a legal action taken by the society. The needs for Notary in the practice of law daily cannot be released from the increasing the economic level at and legal awareness in the society. Notary, according to their profession and deed’s products must be able to ensure certainty and the protection of the law to society. In carries on the guidance and supervision function, the government has develop some local regulations, authority, and obligations of The District Supervisory Council of Notaries, The Province Supervisory Council of Notaries, The Central Supervisory Council of Notaries, up to the Tribunal Honorable Council of Notaries.The problems in this research are whether the decision of The Central Supervisory Council of Notaries No.4/MJ.PPN/2012 and the decision of The Central Supervisory Council of Notaries No.07/B/MJ.PPN/2013 was fulfill The act regarding The Profession of Notary and general principle which accepted in the field of law?And what was the form of supervision of The Central Supervisory Council of Notaries in judging the violation of code of ethical for Notary?The writer used normative type of research and statute approach. Firstly, the research is to conclude that the decision of The Central Supervisory Council of Notaries No.4/MJ.PPN/2012 and the decision of The Central Supervisory Council of Notaries No.07/B/MJ.PPN/2013 is not fulfill meet the general principles which accepted by law, such as and ne bis in idem also not fulfill The Act regarding The Profession of Notary. Secondly, in this matter, they only establihed The Supervisory Council of Notaries and received reports of The Supervisory Council of Notaries, the Act regarding Profession of Notary is not specific where the society still want to do legal remedies after the decision of The Central Supervisory Council of Notaries, even if the entire legal remedy from The District Supervisory Council of Notaries, The Province Supervisory Council of Notaries, The Central Supervisory Council of Notaries have been taken, does not mean that is no other effort of legal remedies. / Dewasa ini kebutuhan akan lembaga Notaris dalam praktek hukum sehari-hari tidak bisa dilepaskan dari meningkatnya tingkat perekonomian dan kesadaran hukum masyarakat.Dalam menjalankan fungsi pembinaan dan pengawasan yang baik, pemerintah telah menyusun beberapa peraturan perundang-undangan yang mengatur tugas, wewenang, dan kewajiban Majelis Pengawas Daerah, Majelis Pengawas Wilayah, Majelis Pengawas Pusat, sampai dengan Majelis Kehormatan Notaris. Permasalahan pada penelitian ini adalah apakah Putusan Majelis Pengawas Pusat Notaris Nomor 04/Mj.PPN/2012 dan Putusan Majelis Pengawas Pusat Notaris Nomor 07/B/Mj.PPN/2013 telah sesuai dengan UUJN dan asas-asas yang berlaku umum di bidang hukum? Dan bagaimana bentuk kewenangan Majelis Pengawas Pusat Notaris dalam memutus pelanggaran Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris? Jenis penelitian yang digunakan adalah tipe penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan undang-undang/statuta approach. Hasil penelitian berkesimpulan pertama bahwa Putusan MPP Nomor 04/B/MJ.PPN/2012 Dan Putusan MPP Nomor 07/B/Mj.PPN/2013 tidak memenuhi asas-asas hukum yang dianut yaitu seperti asas kepastian hukum yaitu ne bis in idem dan akuntabel, melanggar Pasal 34 ayat (6) dan 35 ayat (2) Peraturan Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia Nomor M.02.PR.08.10 TAHUN 2004, Pasal 77 huruf c dan d UUJN. Kedua, kewenangan Majelis Pengawas Pusat Notaris dalam memutus pelanggaran Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris diatur dalam UUJN dan Peraturan Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia Nomor M.02.PR.08.10 TAHUN 2004, Pasal 77 huruf c dan d UUJN yaitu dapat melakukan pemeriksaan terhadap para pihak sehubungan dengan dugaan pelanggaran UUJN, menjatuhkan sanksi pemberhentian sementara, mengusulkan sanksi pemberhentian tidak hormat kepada menteri dan MPP dapat menguatkan, merubah, atau membatasan putusan MPW dan memutus sendiri selama dengan didasarkan pada pertimbangan hukum yang cukup beralasan. Putusan 07/B/Mj-PPN/2013 tidaklah memiliki pertimbangan hukum yang cukup beralasan untuk membatalkan putusan MPW No. 03/Pts/MPWN.Prov.Jabar./I/2012 tanggal 20 Januari 2012 yang mengusulkan pemberhentian sementara bagi Notaris Dyah Susilowati.