INVESTIGATION THE INTEREST OF CREDITOR AND DEBTOR IN SUSPENSION OF DEBT PAYMENT OBLIGATIONS
Abstract
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to determine what interests underlie debtors in proposing debt settlement through PKPU institutions and to analyze the legal position of separatist creditors in the PKPU process. This study uses a juridical normative research method by utilizing the statutory regulatory approach. An alternative way to settle debt payment obligations for debtors is by submitting a suspension of debt payment obligations. The essence of using this institution is to direct the parties in carrying out debt restructuring. In theory, the use of the suspension of debt payment obligation (PKPU) will protect the interests of the parties effectively and fairly. But in practice, this PKPU institution became ineffective and was only used by one party to achieve its own interests. Including the interests of separatist creditors which are limited through SKMA 3/KMA/SK/I/2020, it is implied that there is an injustice for the separatist creditors in submitting PKPU submissions, then the Supreme Court issued SKMA 3/KMA/SK/IV/2020 which revoked the previous regulation while providing legal protection for separatist creditors in the PKPU process. The result of this research is that the debtor's interest in PKPU submission is 1. That debtor wants to restructure its debt 2. Debtor is no longer able to compete with the market. It was also found that the settlement of PKPU cases could be faster than the time period provided by Law 34/2007. Separatist creditors must be included in the PKPU settlement process, because their voting rights will determine the outcome of the agreement and the interests of creditors in a fair and balanced manner, in addition to debt settlement through PKPU institutions based on article 222 Law 34/2007 there is no difference in criteria for creditors.
Keywords: creditors; debtors; suspension of debt payment
Abstrak
Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menentukan kepentingan apa saja yang mendasari debitor dalam mengajukan pemberesan utang melalui lembaga PKPU dan menganalisa kedudukan hukum kreditur separatis dalam proses PKPU. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif yuridis dengan memanfaatkan metode pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan. Jalan alternatif dalam penyelesaian pembayaran kewajiban utang bagi debitor adalah dengan cara mengajukan penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang. Inti dari penggunaan lembaga ini untuk mengarahkan para pihak dalam melakukan restrukturisasi utang. Secara teori penggunaan lembaga penundaan kewajban pembayaran utang(PKPU) akan melindungi kepentingan para pihak secara efektif dan adil. Tapi pada praktiknya, lembaga PKPU ini menjadi tidak efektif dan hanya dimanfaatkan oleh salah satu pihak untuk mencapai kepentinganya sendiri. Termasuk kepentingan kreditur separatis yang dibatasi melalui SKMA 3/KMA/SK/I/2020, tersirat bahwa terjadi ketidakadilan bagi kreditur separatis dalam melakukan pengajuan PKPU, kemudian Mahkamah Agung mengeluarkan SKMA 3/KMA/SK/IV/2020 yang mencabut aturan sebelumnya sekaligus memberikan perlindungan hukum bagi kreditur separatis dalam proses PKPU. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah bahwa kepentingan debitor dalam pengajuan PKPU adalah 1. Bahwa dirinya ingin melakukan restrukturisasi utang 2. Sudah tidak mampu lagi bersaing dengan pasar. Ditemukan pula dalam penyelesaian perkara PKPU bisa lebih cepat dibandingkan periode waktu yang diberikan oleh UU 34/2007. Kreditur separatis harus diikutsertakan dalam proses penyelesaian PKPU, karena hak suaranya akan menentukan hasil kesepakatan dan kepentingan para kreditur secara adil dan seimbang, selain itu dalam pemberesan utang melalui lembaga PKPU berdasarkan pasal 222 UU 34/2007 tidak ada perbedaan kriteria pada kreditur.
Downloads
References
Amalia, Jihan, ‘URGENSI IMPLEMENTASI UNCITRAL MODEL LAW ON CROSS-BOR-DER INSOLVENCY DI INDONESIA: STUDI KOMPARASI HUKUM KEPAILITAN LINTAS BATAS INDONESIA DAN SINGAPURA’, Jurnal Hukum Bisnis Bonum Com-mune, 2019 <https://doi.org/10.30996/jhbbc.v2i2.2499>
Artha, Yohana, ‘Sederet Kasus Perusahaan Yang Tersandung PKPU Dan Kepailitan’, Kompas.Com, 2021
Casanova, Febri Yanti, Lindati Dwiatin, and Dianne Eka, ‘Analisis Homoligasi Dalam Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU) Sebagai Upaya Pencegah Kepailitan (Studi Putusan No.59/Pdt.Sus- PKPU.PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst)’, Pactum Law Journal, 1.2 (2018), 90–98
Dermawan, I Made, ‘Upaya Hukum Terhadap Kreditor Atas Objek Hak Tanggungan Dari Upaya Sita Jaminan Oleh Pihak Ketiga Dalam Kepailitan’, Jurnal Surya Kencana Satu, 9.2 (2019), 15–30
Ginting, Elyta Ras, Hukum Kepailitan: Teori Kepailitan (Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2018)
Hariyadi, Hasdi, ‘RESTRUKTURISASI UTANG SEBAGAI UPAYA PENCEGAHAN KEPAILITAN PADA PERSEROAN TERBATAS’, SIGn Juranl Hukum, 1.2 (2020), 119–35
Idham, Irfan, Syahruddin Nawi, and Hamza Baharuddin, ‘Perlindungan Hukum Kreditor Konkuren Dalam Kepailitan: Studi Putusan Nomor. 04/Pdt.Sus-Pkpu.Pailit/2018/Pn-.Niaga Mks’, Journal of Lex Generalis, 1.5 (2020), 745–58
Ikhwansyah, Isis, and Lambok Marisi Jakobus Sidabutar, ‘The Implementation of Insolvency Test on Debtors’ Bankruptcy in Performing the Principle of Justice’, Jurnal Media Hukum, 26.2 (2019), 240–51 <https://doi.org/10.18196/jmh.20190137>
Kautsar, Izzy Al, and Danang Wahyu Muhammad, ‘Urgensi Pembaharuan Asas-Asas Hukum Pada Undang-Undang No 37 Tahun 2004 Berdasarkan Teori Keadilan Distributif’, Jurnal Panorama Hukum, 5.2 (2020), 182–92 <https://doi.org/https://-doi.org/10.21067/jph.v5i2.4529>
Kliestik, T., M. Misankova, K. Valaskova, and L. Svabova, ‘Bankruptcy Prevention: New Effort to Reflect on Legal and Social Changes’, Science and Engineering Ethics, 24.2 (2018), 791–803
Kornelis, Yudi, and Florianus Yudhi Priyo Amboro, ‘Implementasi Restrukturisasi Dalam Prosesi Kepailitan Dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang Di Indonesia’, Jurnal Selat, 7.2 (2020), 257–77
Lee, Rebecca, and Eric C Ip, ‘Judicial Diplomacy in the Asia-Pacific: Theory and Evidence from the Singapore-Initiated Transnational Judicial Insolvency Network’’, Journal of Corporate Law Studies, 20 (2020), 389–420
Lestari, Sri, and Rizki Kurniawan, ‘Pembaharuan Utang Kreditur Kepada Debitur Sebagai Bentuk Penjatuhan Putusan Pailit’, Jurnal Penelitian Bidang Hukum Universitas Gresik, 8.2 (2019), 276–90
Mantili, Rai, ‘Actio Pauliana Sebagai Upaya Perlindungan Bagi Kreditor Menurut Kitab Undang- Undang Hukum Perdata Dan Undang-Undang Kepailitan Dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU)’, Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata, 6.2 (2020), 21–38
Mavlutova, Inese, Vitalina Babenko, Volodymyr Dykan, and Nataliia Prokopenko, ‘Business Restructuring as a Method of Strengtening Company ’ s Financial Position’, Journal of Optimization in Industrial Engineering, 2021, 105–15 <https://doi.org/10.22094/JOIE.-2020.677839>
Nugroho, Susanti Adi, Hukum Kepailitan Di Indonesia: Dalam Teori Dan Praktik Serta Penerapan Hukumnya (Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group, 2018)
Rachmasariningrum, ‘Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Debitor Atas Proses Kepailitan’, Mah-kamah: Jurnal Kajian Hukum Islam, 5.2 (2020), 160–73
Rahmani, Imanuel, ‘Perlindungan Hukum Kepada Pembeli Dalam Kepailitan Pengem-bang(Developer) Rumah Susun’, Jurnal Hukum Bisnis Bonum Commune, 1.1 (2018), 73–88
Saputri, Elsa Mellinda, Waspiah Waspiah, and Ridwan Arifin, ‘PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP KONSUMEN DALAM HAL PENGEMBANG (DEVELOPER) APARTE-MEN DINYATAKAN PAILIT’, Jurnal Hukum Bisnis Bonum Commune, 2019 <https://d-oi.org/10.30996/jhbbc.v2i2.1936>
Seng, Wee Meng, and Hans Tjio, Singapore as International Debt Restructuring Center : Aspiration and Challenges, NUS Law Working Paper, 2021
Sibagariang, Immanuel Rivanda, ‘KEPASTIAN HUKUM TERHADAP PUTUSAN PENUN-DAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG (STUDI PUTUSAN NO. 20/PDT.SUS- PKPU/2018/PN.MEDAN DAN NO. 21/PDT.SUS-PKPU/2018/PN.MEDAN)’, Jurnal Darma Agung, 29.1 (2021), 1–10
Tampemawa, Stevi G., ‘PROSEDUR DAN TATACARA PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG (PKPU) MENURUT UNDANG-UNDANG NO.37 TAHUN 2004 TENTANG KEPAILITAN DAN PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG’, Lex Privatum, 7.6 (2019), 5–11
Tijo, Hans, ‘Rethinking Share Repurchases’, Capital Markets Law Journal, 16 (2021), 1–15
Wijayanto, Prio, Erna Widjajati, and Yessy Kusumadewi, ‘UPAYA HUKUM BAGI KREDITOR APABILA DEBITOR PAILIT TIDAK MENGAKUI ATAU MENOLAK TAGIHAN UTANGNYA’, Jurnal Krisna Law, 2.2 (2020), 181–88
Authors who publish with Jurnal Hukum Bisnis Bonum Commune agree to the following terms:
- Authors transfer the copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.. that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
