Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Notaris Dalam Menerapkan Prinsip Mengenali Pemilik Manfaat Terhadap Keterangan yang Diperolehnya Dalam Pembuatan Akta Nurwahjuni; Yuniarti; Waluyo, Felia Ramadhanty
Notaire Vol. 7 No. 3 (2024): NOTAIRE
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Airlangga

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20473/ntr.v7i3.60321

Abstract

AbstractNotary as public officials have an obligation to implement the principle of recognizing beneficial owners in a corporation. A notary play an important role in disclosing beneficial ownership of a corporation, however, the transparency of beneficial ownership disclosure must be based on good faith and clear information from parties who representing the corporation. Therefore, the existence of beneficial ownership cannot fully detected by a notary, moreover, a notary has to apply the confidentiality principle. The objective of this research is to find out and examine the legal protection for Notaries regarding the provisions as reporting parties in applying the principle of recognizing the beneficial owners of corporations. The legal research is used as the research method with statute approach and conceptual approach. The results of the research explain that the provisions in Presidential Regulation Number 13 of 2018 must be implemented by the Notary even if this obligation is contrary to the principle of confidentiality. Matters that can be reported by a Notary are only in accordance with what is known and submitted by the parties to prevent misuse of business entities for illegal purposes such as money laundering and terrorism financing.Keywords: Confidential Principle of Deed; Notary Compliance; Beneficial Owner Transparency. AbstrakNotaris sebagai pejabat publik memiliki kewajiban untuk melaksanakan asas mengenali pemilik manfaat dalam suatu perusahaan. Notaris memegang peranan penting dalam pengungkapan kepemilikan manfaat suatu perusahaan, namun demikian, keterbukaan pengungkapan kepemilikan manfaat tersebut harus dilandasi oleh itikad baik dan keterangan yang jelas dari pihak yang mewakili perusahaan tersebut. Keberadaan kepemilikan manfaat tidak dapat sepenuhnya diketahui oleh notaris tanpa adanya itikad baik dan pemberian informasi yang benar, terlebih lagi notaris harus menerapkan asas kerahasiaan. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui dan mengkaji perlindungan hukum bagi Notaris terkait ketentuan sebagai pihak pelapor dalam penerapan asas pengakuan pemilik manfaat korporasi. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian hukum dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konseptual. Hasil penelitian menjelaskan bahwa ketentuan dalam Peraturan Presiden Nomor 13 Tahun 2018 wajib dilaksanakan oleh Notaris meskipun kewajiban tersebut bertentangan dengan asas kerahasiaan. Hal-hal yang dapat dilaporkan oleh Notaris hanya sesuai dengan apa yang diketahui dan disampaikan oleh para pihak untuk mencegah penyalahgunaan badan usaha untuk tujuan yang melanggar hukum seperti pencucian uang dan pendanaan terorisme.Kata Kunci: Prinsip Menjaga Kerahasiaan Isi Akta Notaris; Pelaporan Notaris; Prinsip Mengenali Pemilik Manfaat dari Korporasi.
Akibat Hukum Benda Objek Jaminan Fidusia yang diajukan Jaminan Ulang Hak Jaminan atas Resi Gudang Sriwidyandiyo, Soegih Rasyad; Waluyo, Felia Ramadhanty; Ghaziya, Nataya Shafa
UNES Law Review Vol. 6 No. 1 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Ekasakti

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31933/unesrev.v6i1.903

Abstract

The purpose of this legal article is to identify whether the act of re-securing a Fiduciary Security Object through the granting of a Security Right over a Warehouse Receipt has a valid legal basis and the legal implications that arise. The approach adopted in this article involves analyzing the statutory aspects as well as the conceptual approach. The results of this study reveal that there are potential similarities in the category of collateral objects between fiduciary guarantees and warehouse receipt security rights. This situation has the potential to create problems. The regulation regarding the object of fiduciary guarantee is regulated in Law No. 42/1999 on Fiduciary Guarantee, while the object of guarantee relating to the Security Right on Warehouse Receipt is regulated in Law No. 9/2006 on Warehouse Receipt System, as amended through Law No. 9/2011 on Warehouse Receipt System. It is known that the act of applying for re-collateralization of the object of fiduciary guarantee through the granting of security rights over warehouse receipts does not have a strong legal basis and has the potential to cause legal consequences for the existence of the agreement and the position of creditors in the agreement.