Unilateral Withdrawal of the Fiduciary Security Object Without Any Default by the Debtor (Case Study of Decision No.36/Pdt.G.S/2023/PN Pdg)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38035/jlph.v5i5.2002Keywords:
Fiduciary Security, Parate Executie, Legal Protection, LiabilityAbstract
The development of Indonesia's financing sector has led to legal issues concerning fiduciary security, particularly the unilateral withdrawal of fiduciary collateral by creditors without any default by the debtor, as seen in Decision Number 36/Pdt.G.S/2023/PN Pdg. This research aims to analyze the legal protection for debtors and the liability of creditors when withdrawing fiduciary objects unilaterally in the absence of debtor default. The study employs a normative-juridical method with legislative and case-based approaches. Data was collected through literature review and analyzed qualitatively. The findings indicate that legal protection for debtors remains suboptimal due to the imbalance of power between creditors and debtors under Article 15(2) and (3) of Law No. 42/1999 on Fiduciary Security before the Constitutional Court’s ruling. However, Constitutional Court Decision No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019 strengthened the debtor's position by affirming that default and fiduciary execution must follow judicial procedures. Meanwhile, a creditor’s unilateral withdrawal of fiduciary collateral constitutes an unlawful act under Article 1365 of the Indonesian Civil Code, obliging the creditor to return the fiduciary object and compensate the debtor for material and immaterial losses. In conclusion, a legal balance between creditors and debtors is necessary to ensure fairness and legal certainty in the execution of fiduciary security
References
Abdul Haris. (2023). Legal Protection for Recipients in the Case of Providers of Fiduciary Security Objects That Have Not Been Registered Without the Recipient's Consent. Legalitas: Jurnal Hukum, 15(2).
Agde, N. W. K., et al. (2024). Settlement of Default on Fiduciary Guarantee Credit Agreements at the People's Credit Bank, District Credit Bank (BPR BKK) Karangmalang Sragen (Perseroda). Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar Dan Sosial Humaniora, 3(9).
Anggi, P. T., et al. (2021). Legal Protection for Debtors in the Withdrawal of Fiduciary Security Confiscation Without Going Through Court Auction. Unes Law Review, 4(2).
Anindita. (2024). Legal Protection for Debtors Against Unilateral Execution of Fiduciary Security Confiscation by Creditors. Fakultas Hukum Universitas Widya Mataram.
Bernadetha, A. O. (2022). These Are 4 Valid Requirements for Agreements and Their Consequences If Not Fulfilled. https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/4-syarat-sah-perjanjian-dan-akibatnya-jika-tak-dipenuhi-cl4141/ (accessed April 18, 2025).
Budi Junaedi, et al. (2022). Legal Protection for Debtors on the Withdrawal of Fiduciary Security Objects through Parate Execution. Pattimura Legal Journal, 1(2).
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. (2019). Decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019.
District Court of Padang. (2023). Decision Number 36/Pdt.G.S/2023/PN Pdg.
Financial Services Authority Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6/POJK.07/2022 Concerning Consumer and Community Protection in the Financial Services Sector.
Gunawan Wijaya & Ahmad Yani. (2001). Fiduciary Security. Raja Graindo Persada.
Herry Supriyadi, et al. (2023). Legal Protection of Debtors Against Fiduciary Security Objects in Leasing Finance Companies. Prosiding Seminar Nasional SPs Unilak (SeNasPU).
Hidayat, S. Sedarmayanti. (2002). Research Methodology. CV Mandar Maju.
Husnul Hamka. (2023). Criminal Prosecution for Transferring Fiduciary Security Objects Without the Consent of the Fiduciary Recipient. Philosophia Law Review, 3(1), 5-6.
Indah Sari. (2020). Unlawful Acts (Onrechtmatige Daad) in Criminal Law and Civil Law. Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Dirgantara–Fakultas Hukum Universitas Dirgantara Marsekal Suryadarma, 11(1), 67.
Iswahyudi, et al. (2021). Analysis of PT. Ghalaz Sukses Perkasa Bandar Lampung's Responsibility Related to Default in Housing Sale and Purchase Agreements (Study of Decision Number 02/Pdt.G/2018/PN.Tjk), p. 3.
Jhony Palapa. (2020). Settlement of Defaulting Debtors With Fiduciary Guarantees. Jurnal Sol Justicia, 3(1).
Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata [Indonesian Civil Code].
Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Security.
Kristiane, P., & Herts, T. (2022). Juridical Study of Default in Engagements and Agreements Reviewed from Civil Law. Lex Privatum, 10(3), 6.
Lala Alwi, et al. (2023). Compensation Due to Default in Cooperation Agreements (Profit Sharing) Study of the Civil Code. Kanjoli Business Law Review, 1(2), 110.
Maklonia Meling Moto. (2019). The Effect of Using Learning Media in Education. Indonesian Journal of Primary Education, 3(1).
Mardalena Hanifah, et al. (2024). Unlawful Acts by Creditors in the Execution of Fiduciary Security Objects. UIR Law Review.
Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. (2013). Legal Research. Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Muhamad Djumhana. (2000). Banking Law in Indonesia. PT. Citra Aditya Bakti, p. 525.
Nabillah Nurwandany. (2023). Legal Protection for Debtors on the Withdrawal of Fiduciary Security Objects After Constitutional Court Decision Number 2/PUU-XIX/2021. Universitas Islam Indonesia Yogyakarta, p. 27.
Nadiya Zahra. (2023). Legal Analysis of Creditor Responsibility in Default Credit Agreements (Study of Decision Number 242/Pdt.G/2022/PN Mks). Universitas Muslim Indonesia Makassar, pp. 38-39.
Najlaa, P. V., & Sulastri. (2023). Legal Protection of Creditors Against Objects of Mortgage Rights Confiscated by the State. National Conference On Law Studies (NCOLS), 5(1), 372.
Oey Hoey Tiong. (2006). Fiduciary as Security for Elements of Engagement. Ghalia Indonesia, pp. 66-67.
Rahmandika & Lauditta, H. (2023). Execution of Fiduciary Security Objects as an Unlawful Act: Review of Medan District Court Decision Number 167/Pdt.G/2021/PN Mdn and Tanjung Karang High Court Decision Number 93/PDT/2022/PT TJK. Lex Patrimonium, 2(2), 29.
Sajipto Raharjo. (2006). Legal Science. Citra Aditya Bakti, p. 18.
Sigit Nurhadi Nugraha. (2021). Breach of Contract (Default) in Fiduciary Agreements Based on Article 15 Paragraph (3) of Law Number 42 of 1999 After Constitutional Court Decision Number: 18/PUUXVII/2019 And Constitutional Court Decision Number: 2/PUUXIX/2021. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 2(2).
Soekanto, Sorjono, & Mamudji, Sri. (2001). Normative Legal Research (A Brief Overview). Rajawali Pers.
Sofian, M. H., & Wiwin Yulianingsih. (2023). Legal Protection for Debtors Due to Unlawful Acts Committed by Motor Vehicle Financing Companies. Jurnal Kertha Semaya, 11(9).
Sri Redjeki Slamet. (2013). Claim for Compensation in Unlawful Acts: A Comparison with Breach of Contract. Lex Jurnalica, 10(2), 115-117.
Sudjana, S. (2019). Legal Consequences of Default and Responsibilities of Parties in Factoring Transactions. Veritas et Justitia, 5(2), 374-398, p. 393.
Wibawati, S. T., et al. (2019). Responsibility for the Occurrence of Default (Juridical Review of Purwokerto District Court Decision Number 30/Pdt.GS/2018/PN.Pwt). Soedirman Law Review, 1(1), 165.
Zainal A. Hasibuan. (2007). Research Methodology in Computer Science and Information Technology. Depok.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Marsya Arviela Maharani, Sulastri
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish their manuscripts in this journal agree to the following conditions:
- The copyright on each article belongs to the author(s).
- The author acknowledges that the Journal of Law, Poliitic and Humanities (JLPH) has the right to be the first to publish with a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
- Authors can submit articles separately, arrange for the non-exclusive distribution of manuscripts that have been published in this journal into other versions (e.g., sent to the author's institutional repository, publication into books, etc.), by acknowledging that the manuscript has been published for the first time in the Journal of Law, Poliitic and Humanities (JLPH).
