LIMITATION OF THE CRIMINALIZATION OF BUSINESS DECISIONS FROM THE BUSINESS JUDGMENT RULE PERSPECTIVE: A CASE STUDY OF AMSAL SITEPU IN A COMMANDITAIRE VENNOOTSCHAP
Abstract
This study aims to analyze the limits of criminalization of business decisions from the perspective of the Business Judgment Rule (BJR), using the case study of Amsal Sitepu in a Limited Partnership (CV). The primary focus of the study is to examine the position of BJR in Indonesian corporate law and the conceptual relevance of its application to active partners in CVs who lack the normative protections afforded by Limited Liability Companies. The research method used is a qualitative approach, incorporating juridical-normative methods and case studies, to understand the application of legal principles in practice and identify the boundaries between business risk and criminal liability. This study concludes that the BJR plays a crucial role in limiting the criminalization of business decisions, both normatively within Limited Liability Companies and conceptually against active partners of CVs, in order to maintain a balance between business freedom and legal certainty.
Downloads
References
Adam, C. K., et al. (2024). Analisis hukum tanggung jawab dan implikasi persekutuan: Studi pada persekutuan perdata, firma, dan CV. Media Hukum Indonesia, 2(4).
Ariyadi, F. (2020). Penerapan business judgement rules dalam badan usaha milik negara studi kasus PT Asuransi Jiwasraya. Indonesian Journal of Law and Policy Studies, 1(1), 70.
Boen, H. S. (2008). Bianglala Business Judgment Rule. Jakarta: Tatanusa.
Direktorat Jenderal Administrasi Hukum Umum. Profil badan usaha non-badan hukum.
Fuady, M. (2002). Doktrin-doktrin modern dalam corporate law dan eksistensinya dalam hukum Indonesia. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.
Ghanem, & Refaat. (2024). Comparative study brachial vs femoral access.
Graciella, E., & Gunadi, A. (2025). Penggunaan doktrin Business Judgement Rule dalam hukum perusahaan di Indonesia. Riwayat: Educational Journal of History and Humanities, 8(4).
Hamzah, A. (2010). Asas-asas hukum pidana. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Hadi, S., Suryamah, A., & Afriana, A. (2021). Prinsip Business Judgement Rule dalam pertanggungjawaban hukum direksi BUMN yang melakukan tindakan investasi yang mengakibatkan kerugian. ACTA DIURNAL Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Kenotariatan, 4(2).
Harahap, M. Y. (2021). Hukum perseroan terbatas. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
Ichsan, A. (1976). Hukum dagang. Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita.
Indonesia. Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Dagang.
Indonesia. Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas.
Khairandy, R. (2009). Perseroan terbatas. Yogyakarta: FH UII Press.
Khairiyyah, L. H., & Sugiyono, H. (2025). Kepastian hukum Business Judgement Rule dalam memberikan perlindungan hukum bagi direksi perseroan. Jurnal Fakultas Hukum UPN Veteran Jakarta.
Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. Yurisprudensi MA: Tanggung jawab hukum sekutu aktif CV.
Marzuki, P. M. (2016). Penelitian hukum. Jakarta: Kencana.
Media Indonesia. (2026). Amsal Sitepu divonis bebas dari dakwaan korupsi video profil desa.
Moeljatno. (2008). Asas-asas hukum pidana. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Muhammad, A. (2021). Hukum perusahaan Indonesia. Bandung: PT Citra Aditya Bakti.
Nasution, B. (2003). Penerapan Good Corporate Governance. Jurnal Hukum Bisnis, 22(3), 45.
Rissy, Y. Y. W. (2020). Business Judgement Rule: Ketentuan dan pelaksanaannya oleh pengadilan di Inggris, Kanada dan Indonesia. Mimbar Hukum, 32(2), 275–293.
Sjahdeini, S. R. (2004). Tanggung jawab direksi perseroan terbatas. Jakarta: Kencana.
Widjaja, G. (2008). Risiko hukum dalam aktivitas bisnis. Jakarta: Prenada Media.
Copyright (c) 2026 Andri Wahyu Putranto, Bhenarido Akbar, Elfani Br Ketaren, Evana Ardelia Rein
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
