<![CDATA[Mochammad Abizar Yusro, Sihabudin, Amelia Sri Kusumadewi Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Brawijaya e-mail: abizar.yusro@gmail.com ABSTRAK Penelitian ini meninjau permasalahan terkait Urgensi Pengaturan Mekanisme Gugatan Derivatif (Derivative Action) Oleh Pemegang Saham Sebagai Upaya Perlindungan Perseroan Terbatas Terhadap Perbuatan Direksi Yang Merugikan yang mana hanya diatur dalam 1 (satu) pasal di Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas, tetapi tidak ada aturan spesifik mengenai tata cara dalam proses persidangan. Adanya legal issue ketidaklengkapan norma (incompleteness of norm), menjadi basis penyusuan penelitian skripsi ini. Penelitian ini menggunakan jenis penelitian yuridis-normatif (normative law research), dengan menggunakan metode pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan statute approach) dan pendekatan konseptual (conceptual approach). Bahan hukum (primer, sekunder, dan tersier) yang digunakan dianalisis menggunakan metode analisis deskriptif analitis dengan cara interpretasi gramatikal, sistematis, dan teleologis. Yang mana nantinya menjadi alat untuk mengidentifikasi dan menentukan isi serta makna ketentuan hukum terkait dengan pengaturan mekanisme derivative action oleh pemegang saham sebagai upaya perlindungan perseroan terbatas terhadap perbuatan direksi yang merugikan. Dari hasil penelitian, peneliti memperoleh jawaban dengan cara menguraikan dan menganalisis urgensi pengaturan mekanisme derivative action oleh pemegang saham sebagai upaya perlindungan perseroan terbatas melalui berbagai perspektif, di antaranya: perspektif filosofis, yuridis, sosiologis, ekonomis dan historis. Selain itu, penelitian ini meninjau terkait kesalahan berlogika (logical fallacy) yang umum terjadi di penelitian sebelumnya terkait konsep derivative action. Lalu peneliti juga menguraikan terkait pertanggungjawaban Direksi Perseroan ats perbuatan yang merugikan Perseroan, yang mana Direksi telah diberikan kepercayaan (fiduciary duty) untuk mengurus dan mewakili Perseroan. Pertanggungjawaban Direksi ini juga ditinjau melalui parameter fiduciary duty yakni Duty of Good Faith, Duty of Loyalty, dan Duty of Care sekaligus doktrin-doktrin korporasi seperti: Piercing of the Corporate Veil, Ultra Vires dan Self-Dealing. Pertanggungjawaban Direksi melalui derivative action inilah, diharapkan mampu memberikan pemulihan dan ganti kerugian terhadap Perseroan. Kata Kunci: Gugatan Derivatif, Sengketa Organ Perseroan, Pemegang Saham, Perlindungan Perseroan Terbatas, Perbuatan Direksi Yang Merugikan ABSTRACT This research studies the issue regarding the urging regulation of the mechanism of derivative action performed by a shareholder as a measure to protect a limited liability company from any disadvantaging conduct done by the company director, which is only governed in one article in Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Company, and there is no specific regulation concerning trial procedures at court. The legal issue regarding the norm incompleteness serves as the basis of this study. This study employed normative law research, statutory, and conceptual approaches. Primary secondary, and tertiary legal materials were analyzed using descriptive analyses, grammatical, systematic, and teleological interpretations. These interpretation techniques aim to identify and determine the content and the meaning of the legal provision regarding the regulation of the derivative action mechanism by a shareholder to protect the company from the advantaging director. This study delved into the answer to this problem through several perspectives such as philosophical, juridical, sociological, economic, and historical perspectives. This study also delved into the logical fallacy commonly happening in earlier studies on derivative action and elaborates on the liability of the director regarding his/her disadvantaging action, while the director is given the fiduciary duty to take care of the company. This liability is also seen from fiduciary parameters such as the duty of good faith, the duty of loyalty, and the duty of care andseveral corporate doctrines such as piercing of the corporate veil, ultra vires, and self-dealing. The derivative action as the liability held by the director is believed to facilitate recovery and provide compensation for the company. Keywords: Derivative Lawsuits, Company Organ Dispute, Shareholders, Limited Liability Company Protection, Adverse Actions of Directors]]>
