<![CDATA[This study compares legal frameworks for resolving non-performing loan (NPL) disputes in Indonesia and Singapore amid credit expansion. Using normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, and functional comparative approaches, it examines contractual enforcement, banking regulation, and supervisory governance. Findings indicate that Indonesia emphasizes reactive remedies for contractual default, while Singapore integrates preventive credit risk supervision with collective restructuring through schemes of arrangement. These contrasting approaches shape procedural efficiency, institutional coordination, and financial stability. The study proposes an integrative model combining contractual certainty with risk-based governance. Recommended reforms for Indonesia include binding credit risk management standards, early risk-detection clauses in lending agreements, and court-approved collective restructuring mechanisms. Such measures could strengthen legal certainty, accelerate dispute resolution, and improve resilience while protecting creditor and debtor interests.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
