Agung Iriantoro
Universitas Pancasila, Jakarta, Indonesia

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Supervision of the Notary Supervisory Board on the Use of First Copies as a Substitute for Minutes of Deeds Agung Iriantoro; Rizka Novilawati; Paul Atagamen Aidonojie; Leonid Juryi Galchynsky
Lex Publica Vol. 12 No. 2 (2025)
Publisher : APPTHI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58829/lp.12.2.2025.305

Abstract

The notary public is a government official who bears a significant responsibility in the drafting and safekeeping of the original draft of an authentic deed. However, in practice, there are still notaries facing the loss or damage of such original drafts, which potentially undermines the integrity of legal evidence and the trust of the parties involved. This study employs a normative legal research method, utilizing an analytical approach with primary and secondary legal materials, focusing on statutory regulations. The research findings demonstrate that the Supervisory Council of Notaries carries a substantial responsibility in overseeing the issuance of replacement minutes to ensure that this process does not raise any legal uncertainties and continues to safeguard the document’s security. The comprehensive supervision by Supervisory Council of Notaries involves validating the authenticity of the copied document, assessing procedural propriety, issuing recommendations, and making administrative decisions. Furthermore, the status of the first copy used as a basis for issuing an authentic replacement minute holds an equivalent legal standing to the original minuta, contingent upon compliance with formal requirements stipulated in Article 1888 of the Civil Code (BW) and under stringent supervision by Supervisory Council of Notaries.
Homologation Decision Against Creditors Who Did Participate in The Peace Agreement (Case Study: Decision Number 993 K/Pdt.Sus Bankruptcy/2019) Andi Deswanta; Agung Iriantoro; Watcharee Ariyamang
Journal Evidence Of Law Vol. 4 No. 3 (2025): Journal Evidence Of Law (Desember)
Publisher : CV. Era Digital Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59066/jel.v4i3.1617

Abstract

Homologation decisions in the Debt Payment Obligation Postponement (PKPU) system have universal binding force which creates legal complexity, especially regarding the protection of creditors who do not participate in the peace agreement. This research analyzes the legal force of homologation decisions and protection mechanisms for non-participating creditors based on the Indonesian bankruptcy system through a case study of Supreme Court Decision Number 993 K/Pdt.Sus-Bankruptcy/2019. The research method used is normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches. The results showed that the homologation decision has a fundamental position as an instrument of judicial ratification that transforms the peace agreement into a court decision with an executorial title and universal binding force. Its legal legitimacy is obtained through the fulfillment of quorum and majority requirements in Article 281 of the PKPU Law which applies a dual majority requirement system. However, legal protection for non-participating creditors faces significant limitations as the principle of universal binding force creates complex legal implications, ranging from loss of contractual autonomy to changes in the legal status of receivables. Although there is a cassation remedy mechanism available, in judicial practice such protection is limited to procedural aspects with a high threshold for success, so that the Indonesian PKPU system prioritizes the efficiency of collective settlements over the substantive protection of minority creditors