TINJAUAN PENERAPAN UUK-PKPU TERHADAP HAK KREDITOR PEMEGANG HAK TANGGUNGAN DALAM MELAKSANAKAN EKSEKUSI AGUNAN
Abstract
The Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations Law (UUK-PKPU) provides space for debtors to postpone debt payments and restructure their obligations. However, the existence of a 90-day stay provision in the PKPU process has caused serious problems with the rights of creditors holding mortgage rights, especially in efforts to carry out collateral execution. This study aims to analyze the application of the provision in the context of legal protection of creditors, review its compatibility with the principles of legal certainty and justice, and criticize the potential for legal smuggling that may occur in practice. Through a normative approach and literature study, including linking the conflict of norms between UUK-PKPU and the Mortgage Rights Law (UUHT), this article shows that the dominance of the lex posterior derogat legi priori principle in this context often ignores substantive justice for creditors. The results of this study emphasize the need for legal reform of the PKPU stay period and the balancing of protection between debtors and creditors in the process of postponing debt payment obligations. These findings reinforce the urgency of regulatory reorganization to prevent irregularities in the implementation of bankruptcy law in Indonesia.
Downloads
References
Austin, J. (1961). The Province of Jurisprudence Determined. New York: Liberty Fund.
Dworkin, R. (1986). Law's Empire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Hart, H. L. A. (1994). The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hidayat, R. (2020). Perbandingan Sistem Hukum PKPU di Indonesia dan Negara Eropa. Jurnal Perbandingan Hukum, 16(4), 58-70.
Kelsen, H. (1967). Pure Theory of Law. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Naiborhu, M. I., & Wagiman. (2024). The Fundamental Position of Lex Posterior Derogat Legi Priori in the Conflict of Norms Against the Rights of Holders of the Right to Justice. JIST Publikasi Indonesia, 5(2), 659-671.
Prasetya, H. (2022). Impak Undang-Undang PKPU terhadap Keberlanjutan Usaha Debitor. Jurnal Hukum Bisnis, 17(5), 32-44.
Putra, D. A. (2021). Evaluasi Penerapan UUK-PKPU dalam Perlindungan Hak Kreditor. Jurnal Hukum Ekonomi, 28(3), 114-126.
Rahardjo, S. (2000). Sosiologi Hukum: Perkembangan Metode dan Pilihan Masalah. Jakarta: Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Indonesia (YLBHI).
Republik Indonesia. (1996). Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 1996 tentang Hak Tanggungan atas Tanah Beserta Benda-benda yang Berkaitan dengan Tanah (UUHT). Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1996 Nomor 42.
Republik Indonesia. (2004). Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (UUK-PKPU). Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2004 Nomor 131.
Santoso, F. (2019). Rekonstruksi Hukum Pailit: Sebuah Kajian Terhadap Ketentuan PKPU. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 45(4), 77-91.
Sulistyo, Y. (2020). Kepastian Hukum dan Keadilan dalam Sistem PKPU: Studi Kasus pada Eksekusi Agunan. Jurnal Hukum dan Keadilan, 31(2), 59-75.
Surya, R. (2018). Kritik Terhadap Undang-Undang PKPU dalam Perspektif Hukum Ekonomi. Jurnal Ekonomi Hukum, 13(1), 104-118.
Sutrisno, B. (2023). Harmonisasi Hak Tanggungan dan PKPU dalam Sistem Kepailitan Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara, 20(1), 23-39.
Wardhana, S. (2023). Analisis Pengaruh Undang-Undang PKPU Terhadap Eksekusi Agunan oleh Kreditor. Jurnal Perbankan dan Hukum, 22(3), 93-105.
Wicaksono, R. (2021). PKPU dan Hak Kreditor dalam Menegakkan Eksekusi Agunan: Perspektif Hukum Positivisme. Jurnal Hukum dan Politik, 27(6), 49-62.
Copyright (c) 2025 Biner Sihotang, Mesa Indra Naiborhu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
