Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Priviet Social Sciences Journal Journal Iuris Scientia
Maddenleo T Siagian
Universitas Pamulang
Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
The legal remedy against the execution of an auction that does not yet have a winner is an objection Gitayana Amalia; Maddenleo T Siagian
Priviet Social Sciences Journal Vol. 5 No. 12 (2025): December 2025
Publisher : Privietlab

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55942/pssj.v5i12.1034

Abstract

The execution of a mortgage auction often serves as a legal mechanism for generating disputes between creditors and debtors. Conflicts typically arise when a debtor files a lawsuit challenging an auction process that has not yet been completed, particularly when no winning bidder has been determined yet. This study examines the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia’s Decision No. 2644 K/Pdt/2023 clarifies that the proper legal remedy against an unfinished auction process is not a lawsuit but rather an execution objection (perlawanan eksekusi). Employing a normative juridical method, the research adopts both statutory and case study approaches to analyze the Court’s reasoning and its implications for legal practice. The findings reveal that the Supreme Court establishes execution objection as the sole appropriate legal action at this stage to uphold legal certainty and the effectiveness of the mortgage enforcement process. Nevertheless, protecting the debtor’s rights remains a critical consideration, particularly through mechanisms that ensure adequate notification and access to legal remedies. This decision underscores the court’s effort to balance procedural efficiency with fairness, preventing unnecessary disruption of the execution process while safeguarding the debtor’s opportunity to challenge procedural irregularities. In conclusion, the ruling provides an important precedent for distinguishing between permissible and impermissible legal remedies during the auction execution phase, reinforcing the principle that disputes concerning incomplete auctions must be resolved through execution objections rather than civil litigation.
REKONSTRUKSI ASAS PUBLISITAS DAN KEWAJIBAN ADMINISTRATIF KURATOR DALAM HUKUM KEPAILITAN: ANALISIS PUTUSAN MK NO. 74/PUU-XXIV/2026 Maddenleo T Siagian; Purgito Purgito; Fransiskus Litoama
JOURNAL IURIS SCIENTIA Vol. 4 No. 2 (2026): JOURNAL IURIS SCIENTIA
Publisher : Yayasan Merassa Indonesia Publikasi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62263/

Abstract

Decision of the Constitutional Court No. 74/PUU-XXIV/2026 dated April 29, 2026 introduces a significant shift in the interpretation of Article 74 paragraph (1) of Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU), particularly by expanding the procedural obligations of trustees (curators) in submitting bankruptcy reports. The Court held that curators are not only required to file reports at the Commercial Court Registry, but must also deliver copies of such reports directly to debtors and creditors through various communication channels. This study aims to critically examine the legal and practical implications of this expanded interpretation on the principles of efficiency, effectiveness, and legal certainty within the Indonesian bankruptcy system. This research employs a normative legal method using statutory, conceptual, and case-based approaches, focusing on the Constitutional Court decision. The findings indicate that the expanded administrative obligations imposed on curators may increase bankruptcy costs, create excessive administrative burdens, and reduce the value of the bankruptcy estate available for distribution to creditors. In addition, the ruling raises potential legal uncertainty regarding the validity and evidentiary status of electronically delivered notifications. The decision also reflects elements of judicial activism, as it extends into technical regulatory matters that arguably fall within the competence of the legislature or judicial administrative regulators. Therefore, strengthening transparency in bankruptcy proceedings would be more appropriately achieved through the optimization of integrated digital court information systems rather than by expanding individual notification duties imposed on curators.
Co-Authors Fransiskus Litoama Gitayana Amalia Purgito Purgito