<![CDATA[A notary is a public official who is given authority by the State in making authentic deeds. In making the authentic deed, it must be in accordance with the standards regulated by the Law on the Notary Position, if the Notary is summoned/requested by the Investigator to testify/provide information about the authentic deed made by/before the Notary, then it is the legal obligation of the Notary to fulfill this. The problem discussed in this article is that after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 49/PUU-X/2012 has not fully provided certainty and legal protection for Notaries who exercise the right of default when asked for information or sanctions in the investigation or requested by a judge in court. The research method used is normative juridical with an analytical descriptive approach and laws and regulations. The results of the study show that the legal protection of the MKN is carried out in a repressive manner related to Article 66 Paragraph (1) with the aim of avoiding arbitrary actions by investigators and has not fully provided a guarantee of legal protection for the right to deny the rights of notary officials who are summoned based on the infiltration of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 49/PUU-X/2012.]]>
Copyrights © 2024
