This dissertation is the first thesis to pinpoint the legal issues derived from the Article 281 paragraph (2) of Law Number 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation regarding compensation towards secured creditor(s) who do not agree with the composition plan which has brought several if not many legal issues in practice. The compensation clause is not found under bankruptcy law of other countries namely the United States of America and Netherland. Utilising the statute, philosophical, conceptual, case and economic analysis of law approaches, the research on this dissertation has managed to conclude that the said article creates legal uncertainties towards the debtor, secured creditors either those who agree and/or disagree with the composition plan, unsecured creditor and also in certain way impacting the economic condition of the country by producing bias and uncertain outcome of PKPU. The existence of the article has its own benefit by giving chance to the debtor to redeem the collateral asset, but it needs to be paraphrased so that the article does not conflict with the purpose of the PKPU itself and does not harm the interest of all parties in the PKPU. The article should provide certainty towards the debtor when they give the compensation to the secured creditor who disagree with the composition plan as well as the mechanism on the payment and time limit so that the interest of both parties are well protected. The article should also incorporate the legal consequences towards the debtor should they fail to give the said compensation and the rights of the secured creditor that arise as result from that non compliance.