<![CDATA[Sengketa status kehalalan produk kuliner antara Ayam Goreng Widuran Solo dengan konsumen Muslim di Kota Surakarta merupakan salah satu contoh konflik perlindungan konsumen yang mencerminkan ketegangan antara kepentingan bisnis dan jaminan hak batiniah keagamaan. Isu ini penting untuk dikaji karena berkaitan dengan implementasi prinsip keterbukaan informasi dalam hukum perlindungan konsumen Indonesia, terutama mengenai pemenuhan hak atas jaminan produk halal, akuntabilitas pelaku usaha, dan penegakan hukum melalui otoritas jaminan produk halal. Kasus ini mencuat setelah hasil uji laboratorium resmi dari Badan Penyelenggara Jaminan Produk Halal (BPJPH) menyatakan menu kremesan restoran tersebut positif mengandung unsur babi (porcine), padahal telah beroperasi selama puluhan tahun dan memiliki basis pelanggan Muslim yang besar. Studi-studi sebelumnya banyak membahas sertifikasi halal secara administratif, namun masih terdapat gap dalam pemahaman mengenai efektivitas pertanggungjawaban pelaku usaha atas kerugian immateriil konsumen serta penerapan prinsip tanggung jawab hukum yang berkeadilan. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, penelitian ini merumuskan dua fokus utama: (1) bagaimana pelaksanaan hak konsumen untuk memperoleh informasi yang benar, jelas, dan jujur berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1999 tentang Perlindungan Konsumen terkait kasus status kehalalan produk makanan serta (2) bagaimana konsep tanggung jawab hukum pelaku usaha seharusnya dikembangkan antara berbasis kesalahan (fault liability) atau diperkuat dengan tanggung jawab mutlak (strict liability) dalam sengketa yang berdampak luas pada masyarakat . Penelitian ini merupakan studi yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang (statute approach), pendekatan kasus (case approach), serta analisis doktrin perlindungan konsumen. Pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui penelusuran bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier. Tahapan analisis dilakukan melalui interpretasi yuridis terhadap norma hukum perlindungan konsumen, regulasi jaminan produk halal, serta asas pertanggungjawaban mutlak. Temuan penting menunjukkan bahwa pemenuhan hak konsumen atas informasi kehalalan belum berjalan optimal akibat adanya ketimpangan informasi (asymmetric information), dimana pelaku usaha bersikap reaktif baru mencantumkan keterangan non-halal setelah kasusnya viral di media sosial. Selain itu, sistem pertanggungjawaban hukum perlindungan konsumen di Indonesia pada praktiknya masih dominan menggunakan prinsip berdasarkan kesalahan (fault liability) dengan praduga bertanggung jawab, sehingga menyulitkan konsumen dalam pembuktian kerugian batiniah. Rekomendasi yang diberikan meliputi penguatan sistem pengawasan dan inspeksi berkala oleh BPJPH, penerapan sanksi pidana dan administratif yang tegas terhadap manipulasi informasi pangan, serta perlunya penegakan prinsip strict liability secara penuh untuk menjamin perlindungan spiritual maksimal bagi konsumen Muslim ke depan. ABSTRACT The dispute over the halal status of a culinary product between Ayam Goreng Widuran Solo and Muslim consumers in Surakarta City is an example of a consumer protection conflict that reflects the tension between business interests and the guarantee of spiritual religious rights. This issue is important to examine because it relates to the implementation of the principle of information transparency in Indonesian consumer protection law, particularly regarding the fulfillment of the right to halal product assurance, business actor accountability, and law enforcement through the halal product assurance authority. This case arose after official laboratory tests from the Halal Product Assurance Agency (BPJPH) stated that the restaurant's kremesan menu tested positive for pork (porcine), despite having been in operation for decades and having a large Muslim customer base. Previous studies have largely discussed halal certification administratively, but there is still a gap in understanding the effectiveness of business actors' accountability for consumers' immaterial losses and the application of the principle of equitable legal responsibility. Based on this, this study formulated two main focuses: (1) how to implement consumers' rights to obtain correct, clear, and honest information based on Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection regarding cases of halal status of food products and (2) how the concept of legal responsibility of business actors should be developed between fault-based or strengthened with absolute responsibility (strict liability) in disputes that have a broad impact on society. This research is a normative juridical study using a statute approach, a case approach, and an analysis of consumer protection doctrine. Data collection was carried out through tracing primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The analysis stage was carried out through juridical interpretation of consumer protection legal norms, halal product guarantee regulations, and the principle of absolute responsibility. Important findings show that the fulfillment of consumers' rights to halal information has not been optimal due to information asymmetry, where business actors are reactive and only include non-halal information after the case goes viral on social media. Furthermore, the Indonesian consumer protection legal accountability system still predominantly relies on the principle of fault liability with a presumption of responsibility, making it difficult for consumers to prove their personal losses. Recommendations include strengthening the BPJPH's monitoring and periodic inspection system, implementing strict criminal and administrative sanctions against food information manipulation, and fully enforcing the principle of strict liability to ensure maximum spiritual protection for Muslim consumers going forward.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
