Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

SIMPLE, FAST, AND LOW-COST PRINCIPLES IN ELECTRONIC HEARINGS CIVIL CASES IN THE PENGADILAN NEGERI KELAS 1A PADANG: ASAS SEDERHANA, CEPAT, DAN BIAYA RINGAN PADA SIDANG ELEKTRONIK PERKARA PERDATA DI PENGADILAN NEGERI KELAS 1A PADANG Velia, Vella Aqilla
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 11 No. 01 (2025): Juni
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v11i01.48

The judicial system in Indonesia applies the principles of simplicity, speed, and low cost as stipulated in Law No. 48 of 2009 on Judicial Authority. To realize simple, fast, and low-cost justice, reforms are needed to overcome obstacles and barriers in the administration of justice. Therefore, in 2019, the Supreme Court issued Supreme Court Regulation Number 1 of 2019 concerning Electronic Case Administration and Court Proceedings. The problems addressed in this study are how the principles of simplicity, speed, and low cost are applied in electronic hearings in civil cases at the Padang Class 1A District Court, the obstacles encountered in applying the principles of simplicity, speed, and low cost in electronic hearings in civil cases at the Padang Class 1A District Court, and how to solve them. This research is a type of empirical juridical research, namely research whose primary data is obtained through direct field research through interviews with respondents, namely judges, court clerks, and advocates. Then, a review of legal materials was conducted to obtain secondary data. Based on the results of the research, it can be concluded that the application of the principles of simplicity, speed, and low cost in electronic hearings (PERMA No. 1 of 2019) for civil cases at the Padang Class 1A District Court has been implemented well in accordance with the regulations issued by the Supreme Court (MA). The case registration and trial processes are conducted through e-Court, eliminating the need to visit the court. This saves money and time, as well as energy. The obstacles encountered are a lack of understanding of how to use e-Court, technological illiteracy, and unstable internet connections.

ALTERNATIF PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA UNTUK MENJAMIN KEADILAN PELAYANAN RUMAH SAKIT PASIEN PESERTA BPJS KESEHATAN: ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION TO ENSURE FAIRNESS IN HOSPITAL SERVICES FOR BPJS HEALTH PARTICIPANTS Sigiro, Grace Tasya
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 11 No. 01 (2025): Juni
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v11i01.49

Health is a fundamental right constitutionally guaranteed under the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. In fulfilling this obligation, the government established the National Social Security System through Law No. 40 of 2004 and the Social Security Administration Agency (BPJS) through Law No. 24 of 2011. BPJS Health is mandated to administer the National Health Insurance Program (JKN) to ensure equitable and comprehensive health protection for all citizens. However, in practice, BPJS Health participants continue to encounter various challenges in hospital-based health services, including discriminatory treatment, unequal access, disparities in service quality, and constraints related to financing and administrative procedures. This study aims to examine the extent to which the principle of fairness is fulfilled within the regulatory framework governing hospital health services for BPJS Health participants. Employing a normative legal research method, the study utilizes legislative, conceptual, and analytical approaches and is analyzed descriptively and qualitatively. The findings indicate that efforts to uphold the principle of fairness have been incorporated into regulations addressing service accessibility, quality standards, transparency, and monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. Nevertheless, the principle of fairness has not been fully realized, particularly with regard to distributive and procedural justice, as evidenced by persistent disparities in service delivery. These findings suggest the need for strengthened regulatory enforcement and systemic reforms to ensure equitable health services for all BPJS Health participants.

PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KERUGIAN PIHAK KETIGA AKIBAT PERBUATAN HUKUM DEBITOR PAILIT Ariyanto, Candra Fahmi
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 9 No. 01 (2023): Juni
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v9i01.50

Abstract Bankruptcy aims to provide legal certainty for creditors through the fair and balanced administration of bankruptcy assets. However, in bankruptcy practice, there are often legal actions by bankrupt debtors that cause losses to third parties, both before and during the process. The problem arises when Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and PKPU does not explicitly regulate the mechanism for resolving disputes over losses incurred by third parties as a result of the legal actions of bankrupt debtors, thus creating legal uncertainty. Using a normative legal research method with a legislative approach, conceptual approach, and case approach, specifically through an analysis of commercial court decisions related to the actions of bankrupt debtors that harm third parties. The settlement of disputes over losses to third parties resulting from the legal actions of bankrupt debtors can be pursued through two mechanisms. First, settlement based on the provisions of the UUK-PKPU if the act is directly related to the bankrupt estate. Second, through a lawsuit for unlawful acts based on Article 1365 of the Civil Code if it is not explicitly regulated in the UUK-PKPU, in order to provide legal protection for third parties. Keywords: Bankruptcy, Dispute, Unlawful Acts Abstrak Kepailitan bertujuan untuk memberikan kepastian hukum bagi kreditor melalui pengurusan harta pailit secara adil dan seimbang. Namun, dalam praktik kepailitan kerap terjadi perbuatan hukum debitor pailit yang menimbulkan kerugian bagi pihak ketiga, baik sebelum maupun selama proses berlangsung. Permasalahan muncul ketika Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan PKPU belum mengatur secara tegas mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa atas kerugian pihak ketiga akibat perbuatan hukum debitor pailit, sehingga menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum. Menggunkan metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan Metode pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konseptual, dan pendekatan kasus, khususnya melalui analisis putusan pengadilan niaga terkait perbuatan debitor pailit yang merugikan pihak ketiga. Penyelesaian sengketa kerugian pihak ketiga akibat perbuatan hukum debitor pailit dapat ditempuh melalui dua mekanisme. Pertama, penyelesaian berdasarkan ketentuan UUK-PKPU apabila perbuatan tersebut berkaitan langsung dengan harta pailit. Kedua, melalui gugatan perbuatan melawan hukum berdasarkan Pasal 1365 BW apabila tidak diatur secara eksplisit dalam UUK-PKPU, guna memberikan perlindungan hukum bagi pihak ketiga. Kata Kunci: Kepailitan, Sengketa, Perbuatan Melawan Hukum

PEMBUKTIAN KERUGIAN PENUMPANG TANPA TEMPAT DUDUK KERETA API RAPIH DHOHO DITINJAU DARI STANDAR PELAYANAN MINIMUM PERMENHUB NOMOR 63 TAHUN 2019 Pratiwi, Santi Indah
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 9 No. 01 (2023): Juni
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v9i01.51

Abstract This research is an empirical legal research which examines the applicable legal provissions regarding the legal protection of passengers without a seat on the Rapih Dhoho train, using an empirical juridical approach then analyzed with descriptively qualitatively to make it easier to draw conclusions and answer the problems posed. The results of this study indicate that the service facilities at KA Rapih Dhoho are not in accordance with the minimum service standards specified in Regulation of the Minister of Transportation (Permenhub) No. 63 Tahun 2019 and not paying attention to the SPM during the trip mainly to standing passengers for KA Rapih Dhoho which enforces ticket sales without seats. And regarding legal protection for passengers KA Rapih Dhoho is not accomplished according to Article 132 verse (2) Railway Law (UU Perkeretaapian) by not providing compensation to passengers who suffer losses for which PT KAI is obliged to pay compensation as stated in Article 157 verse 3 Railway Law. so that the tickets held by passengers can be used as evidence in accordance with Article 164 HIR. Keywords: Legal Protection; Passengers; Facilities; Abstrak Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum empiris yang mengkaji ketentuan hukum yang berlaku mengenai perlindungan hukum bagi penumpang tanpa tempat duduk di kereta Rapih Dhoho, menggunakan pendekatan hukum empiris kemudian dianalisis secara deskriptif kualitatif untuk memudahkan penarikan kesimpulan dan menjawab permasalahan yang diajukan. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa fasilitas layanan di KA Rapih Dhoho tidak sesuai dengan standar layanan minimum yang ditetapkan dalam Peraturan Menteri Perhubungan (Permenhub) Nomor 63 Tahun 2019 dan tidak memperhatikan SPM selama perjalanan, terutama bagi penumpang yang berdiri di KA Rapih Dhoho yang menerapkan penjualan tiket tanpa kursi. Dan mengenai perlindungan hukum bagi penumpang KA Rapih Dhoho, hal ini tidak dipenuhi sesuai dengan Pasal 132 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Perkeretaapian (UU Perkeretaapian) dengan tidak memberikan kompensasi kepada penumpang yang mengalami kerugian, padahal PT KAI wajib membayar kompensasi sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 157 ayat 3 Undang-Undang Perkeretaapian sehingga tiket yang dimiliki penumpang dapat digunakan sebagai alat bukti sesuai dengan Pasal 164 HIR. Kata Kunci: Perlindungan Hukum; Penumpang; fasilitas;

IMPLIKASI EIGENDOM VERPONDING TERHADAP TIMBULNYA SENGKETA HAK ATAS TANAH DI INDONESIA Hapsari, Devi Nuzulin; Nazidah, Febrianti Putri Ainun
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 9 No. 01 (2023): Juni
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v9i01.52

Abstract Eigendom Verponding rights should have expired and been converted to Freehold Rights by September 1980 at the latest, based on Minister of Agrarian Affairs Regulation No. 2 of 1960 in conjunction with Minister of Agrarian Affairs Regulation No. 13 of 1961. However, many holders of western land rights did not convert their rights, resulting in the former western land rights becoming abandoned and triggering disputes. This is reflected in Cassation Decision No. 934 K/Pdt/2019, which states that the Eigendom Verponding in the name of George Henrik Muller has expired, but Review Decision No. 109 PK/Pdt/2022 granted the lawsuit and established ownership rights over the disputed object. The difference in these decisions has created legal uncertainty and undermined the sense of justice. This study uses a normative juridical method with a regulatory, conceptual, and case approach. The results show that the failure to implement the conversion resulted in the termination of the Eigendom Verponding rights, and that the inconsistency of court decisions has the potential to weaken legal certainty in the national land system. Keywords: Keywords: Conversion; Eigendom Verponding; Court Decision Abstrak Hak Eigendom Verponding seharusnya berakhir dan dikonversi menjadi Hak Milik paling lambat September 1980 berdasarkan Permen Agraria No. 2 Tahun 1960 juncto Permen Agraria No. 13 Tahun 1961. Namun, banyak pemegang hak tanah barat tidak melakukan konversi, sehingga tanah bekas hak barat menjadi terlantar dan memicu sengketa. Hal ini tercermin dalam Putusan Kasasi No. 934 K/Pdt/2019 yang menyatakan Eigendom Verponding atas nama George Henrik Muller telah berakhir, tetapi Putusan Peninjauan Kembali No. 109 PK/Pdt/2022 justru mengabulkan gugatan dan menetapkan hak kepemilikan atas objek sengketa. Perbedaan putusan tersebut menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum dan goncangan rasa keadilan. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan pendekatan kasus. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tidak dilaksanakannya konversi mengakibatkan hapusnya hak Eigendom Verponding, serta inkonsistensi putusan pengadilan berpotensi melemahkan kepastian hukum dalam sistem pertanahan nasional. Kata Kunci: Konversi; Eigendom Verponding; Putusan Hakim

REKONSTRUKSI PARADIGMA PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA SEBAGAI OPTIMALISASI UPAYA NONLITIGASI Aisyah Putri, Suhair
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 10 No. 01 (2024): Juni
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v10i01.39

Abstract The high caseload in Indonesian courts reflects a disorientation in the objectives of the law, with society tending towards a litigation-centric approach. This has resulted in a massive backlog of cases and a decline in the quality of judicial decisions. This study aims to formulate a reconstruction of the dispute resolution paradigm by optimizing the role of non-litigation mediators, using a comparative study with the Dutch legal system. The research method used is normative juridical, with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. The results show that although Indonesia has an ideological basis for deliberation and mediation regulations (the APS Law and PERMA No. 1/2016), there are weaknesses in the executorial power of non-litigation settlement deeds, which still require a new litigation process in the event of a default. In contrast, the Netherlands has a more integrative system where mediation results can be formalized in a vaststellingsovereenkomst through a notarial deed, which has direct executorial power (parate executie). Furthermore, the Netherlands has strong professional standards through the Mediators Federatie Nederland (MfN). This study concludes that Indonesia needs to undertake structural reconstruction by strengthening the legality of non-litigation mediation outcomes to equalize legally binding decisions, and adopting a mandatory mediation information session mechanism before filing a lawsuit. This transformation is crucial for restoring the court's function as the ultimum remedium and realizing the principles of a simple, expeditious, and low-cost justice system. Keywords: Non Litigation; Case Backlog; Mediator; Comparative Law; Abstrak Beban kasus yang tinggi di pengadilan Indonesia mencerminkan ketidakjelasan tujuan hukum, dengan masyarakat cenderung mengadopsi pendekatan yang berpusat pada litigasi. Hal ini telah menyebabkan penumpukan kasus yang besar dan penurunan kualitas putusan pengadilan. Studi ini bertujuan untuk merumuskan rekonstruksi paradigma penyelesaian sengketa dengan mengoptimalkan peran mediator non-litigasi, menggunakan studi perbandingan dengan sistem hukum Belanda. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah normatif yudisial, dengan pendekatan statuta, konseptual, dan komparatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa meskipun Indonesia memiliki dasar ideologis untuk peraturan deliberasi dan mediasi (Undang-Undang APS dan PERMA No. 1/2016), terdapat kelemahan dalam kekuatan eksekutorial akta penyelesaian non-litigasi, yang masih memerlukan proses litigasi baru jika terjadi wanprestasi. Di sisi lain, Belanda memiliki sistem yang lebih terintegrasi di mana hasil mediasi dapat diformalkan dalam vaststellingsovereenkomst melalui akta notaris, yang memiliki kekuatan eksekutorial langsung (parate executie). Selain itu, Belanda memiliki standar profesional yang kuat melalui Federasi Mediator Belanda (MfN). Studi ini menyimpulkan bahwa Indonesia perlu melakukan rekonstruksi struktural dengan memperkuat legalitas hasil mediasi non-litigasi agar setara dengan keputusan yang mengikat secara hukum, serta mengadopsi mekanisme sesi informasi mediasi wajib sebelum mengajukan gugatan. Transformasi ini sangat penting untuk memulihkan fungsi pengadilan sebagai ultimum remedium dan mewujudkan prinsip-prinsip sistem peradilan yang sederhana, cepat, dan murah. Kata Kunci: Non Litigasi; Tumpukan Perkara; Mediator; Hukum Perbandingan;

IMPLEMENTASI DAN EFEKTIVITAS MEDIASI NON-LITIGASI DALAM PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA Margaretha Novalinda, Divanya Elizabeth
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 9 No. 02 (2023): Desember
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v9i02.44

Abstract Non-litigation mediation is a dispute resolution mechanism to reduce the burden on the courts and provide sustainable dispute resolution. Its effectiveness depends on regulations, institutions, and the level of professionalization of mediators. This study analyzes and compares the role of non-litigation mediators in the Indonesian and German legal systems in terms of the effectiveness of their implementation. This study uses a normative legal method with a comparative law approach, analyzed qualitatively and descriptively-analytically through primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. In Indonesia, non-litigation mediation has not been used optimally because it is not supported by specific laws, resulting in low professionalization of mediators. In contrast, Germany has comprehensively regulated mediation through the Mediationsgesetz, which recognizes mediators as an independent profession and positions mediation as the primary alternative to litigation with a relatively high success rate. This study concludes that strengthening non-litigation mediation in Indonesia requires regulatory consolidation, increased mediator professionalism, and institutional strengthening so that mediation functions effectively in the dispute resolution system. Keywords: non-litigation mediation; mediator; comparative law Abstrak Mediasi non-litigasi merupakan mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa untuk mengurangi beban perkara pengadilan serta penyelesaian sengketa yang berkelanjutan. Efektivitasnya bergantung pada regulasi, institusional, dan tingkat profesionalisasi mediator. menganalisis dan membandingkan peran mediator non-litigasi dalam sistem hukum Indonesia dan Jerman yaitu pada efektivitas implementasinya. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perbandingan hukum, dianalisis secara kualitatif dan deskriptif-analitis melalui bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier. Di Indonesia, mediasi non-litigasi belum digunakan secara optimal karena belum didukung undang-undang khusus, sehingga berdampak rendahnya profesionalisasi mediator. Sebaliknya, Jerman telah mengatur mediasi secara komprehensif melalui Mediationsgesetz, yang mengakui mediator sebagai profesi independen dan menempatkan mediasi sebagai alternatif utama litigasi dengan tingkat keberhasilan relatif tinggi. Studi ini menyimpulkan bahwa penguatan mediasi non-litigasi di Indonesia memerlukan konsolidasi regulasi, peningkatan profesionalisme mediator, dan penguatan kelembagaan agar mediasi berfungsi efektif dalam sistem penyelesaian sengketa. Kata Kunci: mediasi non litigasi; ediator; perbandingan;

OPTIMALISASI MEDIASI NON-LITIGASI SEBAGAI ALTERNATIF PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA DALAM BIDANG PERTANAHAN Maylesta, Nabil Rantisi
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 10 No. 02 (2024): Desember
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v10i02.45

Abstract Land disputes constitute one of the most complex forms of civil disputes, as they involve private law relations, state administrative authority, and broader social and economic interests. In Indonesian civil justice practice, the resolution of land disputes through litigation often requires a prolonged process, incurs high costs, and risks exacerbating conflicts between the parties. Consequently, non-litigation mediation has developed as a pre-adjudicative mechanism aimed at facilitating amicable settlement prior to judicial examination. This article examines the implementation of non-litigation mediation in the resolution of land disputes in Indonesia and compares it with land mediation practices in Germany. The research employs a normative juridical method, utilizing statutory and comparative law approaches. The findings indicate that Indonesia positions land mediation as an administrative instrument integrated with state authority to maintain orderly land administration, whereas Germany emphasizes mediation as a civil dispute resolution mechanism characterized by professional independence. This article argues that the optimization of land dispute mediation in Indonesia should be directed toward strengthening the quality and professionalism of the mediation process, while preserving the administrative role of the state in ensuring legal certainty and order in land administration. Keywords: mediation; land disputes; non-litigation dispute resolution; civil procedure law; comparative law Abstrak Perlindungan hukum terhadap pembela HAM di Indonesia berada di titik yang mengkhawatirkan. Penelitian socio legal ini ini fokus terhadap kondisi objektif perlindungan hukum pembela HAM serta perlindungan hukum terhadap pembela HAM dalam perspektif teori tentang alasan penghapus pidana. Hasilnya, pembela HAM masih mengalami penangkapan, penembakan, dan penyiksaan dan masih ditemukan beberapa kebijakan hukum pidana yang justru berpotensi melanggar hak dan jaminan perlindungan hukum terhadap pembela HAM. Kedua, “the theory of lesser evils” dapat digunakan sebagai dasar untuk memberikan perlindungan hukum terhadap pembela HAM. Sepanjang perbuatan pembela HAM itu untuk melaksanakan Pasal 67 UU No. 32 Tahun 2009, misalnya, maka pembela HAM dapat dipandang sedang “melaksanakan peraturan perundang-undangan” dan dilindungi oleh Pasal 66 UU No. 32 Tahun 2009, sehingga Pasal 50 KUHP dapat diterapkan sebagai alasan penghapus pidana. Ke depan, pedoman pemidanaan terhadap pembela HAM tatkala berhadapan dengan proses penyelesaian perkara pidana juga diperlukan sebagai perlindungan hukum. Kata Kunci: Perlindungan Hukum, Pembela HAM, Alasan Penghapus Pidana

PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA ATAS PEMBERIAN KETERANGAN TIDAK BENAR DEBITOR DALAM PROSES KEPAILITAN Hlaaillah Diah Permada Margadineta, Qifatah; Nugroho, Lucky Dafira
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 9 No. 02 (2023): Desember
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v9i02.46

Abstract The bankruptcy process and the cooperative attitude of the bankrupt debtor are important factors for the successful resolution of cases. Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and PKPU (UUK-PKPU) is based on the principles of balance and fairness, one of which is to minimize debtor fraud. However, in practice, there are still cases of fraud that are not explicitly regulated, such as the provision of false statements regarding the debtor's assets. This study examines two issues, namely the impact of false statements by debtors on bankruptcy assets and the legal liability of debtors who cause harm to third parties. The research method used is normative with a legislative approach, conceptual approach, and comparative approach, referring to the Malaysian Insolvency Act 1967. The issues are analyzed through Decision Number 06/Pdt.Sus-Plw. Pailit/2018/PN Niaga Surabaya, which shows a legal vacuum in the UUK-PKPU because it does not require the accuracy of debtor information. As a result, false statements do not affect bankruptcy assets according to Article 26 paragraph (2), so that the debtor's liability can be settled through the UUK-PKPU or Article 1365 of the Civil Code. Keywords: Liability; Debtor; Bankruptcy; Third Party; Loss Abstrak Proses kepailitan, sikap kooperatif debitor pailit merupakan faktor penting bagi keberhasilan penyelesaian perkara. Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan PKPU (UUK-PKPU) berlandaskan prinsip keseimbangan dan keadilan, salah satunya untuk meminimalkan kecurangan debitor. Namun, dalam praktik masih ditemukan tindakan penipuan yang belum diatur secara tegas, seperti pemberian pernyataan palsu mengenai harta debitor. Penelitian ini mengkaji dua permasalahan, yaitu dampak pernyataan palsu debitor terhadap harta pailit serta tanggung jawab hukum debitor yang merugikan pihak ketiga. Metode penelitian Normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konseptual dan pendekatan komparatif. merujuk Malaysia Insolvency Act 1967 Permasalahan dianalisis melalui Putusan Nomor 06/Pdt.Sus-Plw.Pailit/2018/PN Niaga Surabaya yang menunjukkan adanya kekosongan hukum dalam UUK-PKPU karena tidak mewajibkan kebenaran informasi debitor. Akibatnya, pernyataan palsu tidak berdampak pada harta pailit menurut Pasal 26 ayat (2) sehingga Tanggung jawab debitor dapat diselesaikan melalui UUK-PKPU atau Pasal 1365 BW. Kata Kunci: Tanggung Gugat; Debitor; Pailit; Pihak Ketiga; Kerugian

PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA TANAH GRONDKAART MELALUI KONVERSI DEMI KEPASTIAN HUKUM DI INDONESIA Putra Zein, Achmad Raditya; Ghibran Alhamda, Ismetullah Maulana
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 9 No. 02 (2023): Desember
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v9i02.53

Abstract The Grondkaart originated from the Dutch colonial era as proof of ownership, which is questionable because the revocation of the domein verklaring concept and its replacement with the concept of State Control automatically obscured the status of the Grondkaart land itself, resulting in differences of opinion between the community, judges, the government, and PT KAI. The research method used in this study is normative juridical through a legislative approach to identify legal gaps in the regulation of Grondkaart. Regulated in Government Regulation No. 8 of 1953 concerning State Land Control, Grondkaart is omitted from the provisions of the conversion of the Basic Agrarian Law (UUPA). Therefore, an application for land certification into Right of Use and/or Right of Management must be made as mandated by Article 49 (1) of Law No. 1 of 2004 concerning State Treasury in conjunction with Article 46 of Law No. 23 of 2007 concerning Railways. Keywords: Grondkaart, Disputes, Special Use Rights Abstrak Grondkaart berasal dari konsepsi jaman Belanda sebagai bukti kepemilikan menjadi patut dipertanyakan karena dari dicabutnya konsep domein verklaring menjadi konsep Hak Menguasai Negara secara otomatis mengaburkan kedudukan tanah Grondkaart itu sendiri, sehingga terdapat perbedaan pandangan antara masyarakat, Hakim, Pemerintah dan PT KAI. Metode Penelitian yang digunakan dalam melakukan penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif melalui Pendekatan Perundang-Undangan untuk mengidentifikasi kekosongan hukum pengaturan Grondkaart. Diatur dalam PP No. 8 Tahun 1953 Tentang Penguasaan Tanah-Tanah Negara, Grondkaart luput dari ketentuan konversi UUPA. Sehingga harus dilakukan permohonan sertifikasi tanah menjadi Hak Pakai dan atau Hak Pengelolaan sebagaimana amanah Pasal 49 (1) Undang-Undang No. 1 Tahun 2004 Tentang Perbendaharaan Negara jo. Pasal 46 Undang-Undang No. 23 Tahun 2007 Tentang Perkeretaapian. Kata Kunci: Grondkaart, Sengketa, Hak Pakai

Home Page

OAI Link

Editorial Team

Contact

Reviewer

Google Scholar

Contact Name
MOH. LU'AY KHOIRONI

Contact Email
jurnal.adhaper@gmail.com

Phone
+6281252568899

Journal Mail Official
jurnal.adhaper@gmail.com

Editorial Address
Jl. Progo No. 17 Bandung (Biro Bantuan Hukum Universitas Padjadjaran)

Location
,

INDONESIA

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Home Page

OAI Link

Editorial Team

Contact

Reviewer

Google Scholar

Contact Name MOH. LU'AY KHOIRONI

Contact Email jurnal.adhaper@gmail.com

Phone +6281252568899

Journal Mail Official jurnal.adhaper@gmail.com

Editorial Address Jl. Progo No. 17 Bandung (Biro Bantuan Hukum Universitas Padjadjaran)

Location , INDONESIA

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Contact Name
MOH. LU'AY KHOIRONI

Contact Email
jurnal.adhaper@gmail.com

Phone
+6281252568899

Journal Mail Official
jurnal.adhaper@gmail.com

Editorial Address
Jl. Progo No. 17 Bandung (Biro Bantuan Hukum Universitas Padjadjaran)

Location
,

INDONESIA