Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Dewasa ini, pelaku usaha baik perorangan maupun badan hukum membutuhkan modal usaha yang cukup besar untuk menjalankan usahanya. Oleh karena itu diadakan perjanjian hutang piutang antara pemberi kredit (kreditur) dengan penerima pinjaman (debitur). Salah satu persyaratan dari perjanjian kredit adalah keharusan adanya agunan sebagai jaminan. Dengan diberlakukannya Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 Tentang Jaminan Fidusia memberikan pengamanan terhadap pelaku usaha dalam memberikan kredit, baik itu terhadap lembaga keuangan bank maupun non bank (lembaga pembiayaan konsumen). Pada saat debitur wanprestasi, maka akan dilakukan eksekusi terhadap objek jaminan fidusia. Pelaksanaan eksekusi objek jaminan fidusia merupakan masalah yang penting seiring dengan semakin berkembangnya pemberian kredit. Dalam pasal 29 sampai dengan pasal 34 Undang- Undang No. 42 Tahun 1999 Tentang Fidusia diatur apabila seorang debitur melakukan wanprestasi. Parate eksekusi merupakan ciri khas eksekusi jaminan fidusia yang memberikan kemudahan pelaksanaannya kepada kreditur penerima fidusia apabila debitur melakukan wanprestasi atau cidera janji. Namun, dalam prakteknya, khususnya di PT Gemilang Usaha Persada Finance, ketentuan tersebut sulit untuk dilaksanakan sebagaimana mestinya. Berdasarkan hal-hal tersebut perlu dikaji lebih lanjut bagaimanakah keefektifan pelaksanakan parate eksekusi objek jaminan fidusia pada PT Gemilang Usaha Persada Finance dan faktor-faktor apakah yang menjadi hambatan dalam pelaksanaan eksekusi jaminan fidusia tersebut.Dari hasil penelitian menunjukkan ketidakefektifan pelaksanaan parate eksekusi dalam praktek karena untuk pelaksanaan eksekusi tetap membutuhkan fiat eksekusi serta gugatan ke Pengadilan Negeri. Selain itu,masih banyak terdapat hambatan-hambatan dalam pelaksanaan parate eksekusi antara lain masih banyaknya Jaminan Fidusia yang tidak dibuat dalam bentuk akta otentik sebagaimana ditetapkan dalam Undang-Undang Jaminan Fidusia. Oleh karena itu, dibutuhkan revisi terhadap Undang-Undang Jaminan Fidusia yang berpotensi menyebabkan kendala pelaksanaan eksekusi dan pengaturan jangka waktu maksimum pendaftaran fidusia sehingga tercapai suatu kepastian hukum. Adapun metode penelitian dalam dalam penulisan tesis ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan tipe penelitian normatif yaitu dengan mengkaji dan menganalisis hubungan antara praktek eksekusi objek jaminan fidusia pada PT Gemilang Usaha Persada dengan didasarkan pada peraturanperaturan yang terkait dengan hal tersebut serta wawancara terhadap narasumber untuk mendukung perolehan keakuratan data penelitian.

---

Currently, business actors, both individual as well as legal entity require a quite extensive capital to run their business. Therefore, loan agreement is made between the creditor and the debtor. One of the terms for loan agreement is the stipulation for security as warranty for potential of the default of the debtor. With the implementation of the Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning fidusia security provide security for business actor in providing credit both for banking as well as non bank institutions (consumer finance institutions). Upon the default of the debtor the fidusia security shall be seized by the financing institution. The implementation of seizure for fidusia security?s object is a crucial issues parallel to the development of credit provision. The execution of fidusia warranty?s object is regulated in the Article 29 to Article 34 of the Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning fidusia security, where the Law stipulated that when a debtor perform deafult, execution of fidusia security?s object may be exercised through parate execution and private sale. Parate execution is a characteristic of execution for fidusia security which provide ease of execution for the fidusia?s recipient creditor if the creditor perform non-conformance. But in the practice, in particular in PT Gemilang Usaha Persada Finance the stipulation is difficult to be exercised as it should. Based on these matters a further study concerning how is the effectivity of parate execution of fidusia security?s object on PT. Gemilang Usaha Persada Finance and also which factors function as barrier in the implementation of parate execution of the fidusia security object from the side of the debtor, the creditor as well as insufficiencies of the Law regulating the issue.The result of the research showed the inefficiency of the practice of parate execution due to the requirement of execution fiat execution and claim to State Court, thus it is irrelevant to the purpose of the Law itself. In addition, there are numerous hindrances in the implementation of parate execution namely that the act of Fidusia security is not made as authentic deed as regulated at the Law of Fidusia Security. Therefore, a revision is required to the Law of Fidusia security which having potential to cause barrier to the execution and the maximum term of fidusia registration to obtain a legal certainty. The Method of research used in this thesis is normative juridical and normative research type by reviewing and analyzing the relationship of the practice of execution of fidusia warranty object on PT.Gemilang Usaha Persada based on the relevant regulations and interview to the informants to support data accuracy."

"Hak untuk dilupakan (RTBF) sebagai salah satu perkembangan hukum baru-baru ini yang dibangun sebagai pengembangan hak privasi dan perlindungan data penting bagi masyarakat informasi zaman sekarang dan perkembangan teknologi informasi. Berbagai sistem hukum di dunia termasuk Indonesia telah memasukkan RTBF dalam kerangka hukum mereka yang dilengkapi dengan sejumlah masalah. Oleh karena itu, Penulis mencoba untuk menganalisis peraturan hak tersebut dalam sistem hukum Indonesia yang terkandung dalam undang-undang dan menganalisis posisinya dalam undang-undang dengan membandingkannya dengan peraturan RTBF dari sistem hukum lain. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian hukum normatif yang menggunakan metode penelitian deskriptif analitik. Studi ini menemukan bahwa peraturan perlindungan data yang mendasari pembentukan RTBF di Indonesia bersifat sporadis dan belum ada peraturan yang terharmonisasi tentang perlindungan data. Perumusan RTBF dalam Pasal 26 ayat (3) Undang-Undang Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 tentang Revisi Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik (UU ITE) bermasalah. Meski begitu, di berbagai negara, RTBF telah diimplementasikan sebagai alat penyeimbang melalui pendekatan kontekstual dalam menangani kasus. Untuk alasan ini, maka perlu untuk melakukan analisis hukum perumusan RTBF di Indonesia dengan mengacu pada perumusan hak yang sama yang diterapkan di sistem hukum lain.

---

The right to be forgotten (RTBF) as one of the recent legal developments that is constructed as a development of the right to privacy and data protection is crucial in this day and age information society and development of information technology. Various jurisdictions in the world including Indonesia’s have incorporated the RTBF in their legal frameworks which comes with a number of problems. For that reason, the Author tries to analyze the Indonesian regulatory framework on the RTBF contained in the legislation and analyze its position in the law by comparing and contrasting other jurisdictions’ regulatory frameworks against it. This research is a normative legal research that uses descriptive analytical research method. This study found that the data protection regulation which underlies the establishment of the RTBF in Indonesia is sporadic and that no harmonized regulation on data protection has not yet been established. The formulation of the RTBF in Article 26 paragraph (3) of Law Number 19 Year 2016 on The Revision to Law Number 11 Year 2008 on Information and Electronic Transactions (ITE Law) is problematic. Even so, in various jurisdictions, a balancing tool has been made out of the RTBF through contextual approach on dealing with cases. For this reason, it is necessary to conduct a legal analysis of the formulation of the RTBF in Indonesia with the reference to the formulation of the same right that is applied in other jurisdictions."

"Kepastian dan perlindungan hukum bagi kreditur dalam pelaksanaan eksekusi jaminan fidusia menjadi isu penting, terutama setelah lahirnya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor: 18/PUU-XVII/2019 dan Nomor: 2/PUU-XIX/2021. Putusan tersebut memberikan dampak signifikan terhadap mekanisme eksekusi jaminan fidusia di Indonesia, khususnya dalam menyeimbangkan hak-hak kreditur dan debitur. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis pengaruh kedua putusan tersebut terhadap kepastian hukum dan perlindungan bagi kreditur dalam praktik eksekusi jaminan fidusia. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif dengan mengacu pada peraturan perundang-undangan, doktrin hukum, serta putusan pengadilan. Dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor: 18/PUU-XVII/2019, ditegaskan bahwa eksekusi jaminan fidusia oleh kreditur hanya dapat dilakukan apabila terdapat kesepakatan terkait wanprestasi antara kreditur dan debitur atau melalui penetapan pengadilan. Sementara itu, Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor: 2/PUU-XIX/2021 memperkuat perlindungan terhadap debitur dengan memastikan adanya mekanisme keberatan dalam proses eksekusi. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa kedua putusan tersebut mengubah orientasi eksekusi jaminan fidusia dari yang sebelumnya berfokus pada kepentingan kreditur menjadi lebih berimbang dengan memperhatikan hak debitur. Namun, perubahan ini memunculkan tantangan berupa potensi keterlambatan dan peningkatan biaya eksekusi. Oleh karena itu, diperlukan penyusunan regulasi yang lebih komprehensif untuk memastikan kepastian hukum bagi kreditur sekaligus melindungi hak-hak debitur. Kesimpulannya, Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi menghadirkan reformasi hukum yang penting dalam pelaksanaan eksekusi jaminan fidusia. Namun, harmonisasi regulasi tetap diperlukan untuk mewujudkan keseimbangan antara kepastian hukum bagi kreditur dan keadilan bagi debitur.

---

Legal certainty and protection for creditors in the execution of fiduciary guarantees have become significant issues, particularly following the Constitutional Court Decisions No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019 and No. 2/PUU-XIX/2021. These decisions have significantly impacted the mechanism for executing fiduciary guarantees in Indonesia, especially in balancing the rights of creditors and debtors. This study aims to analyse the influence of these decisions on legal certainty and creditor protection in fiduciary guarantee executions. This research employs a normative juridical approach, referencing statutory regulations, legal doctrines, and court rulings. Constitutional Court Decision No: 18/PUU-XVII/2019 stipulates that the execution of fiduciary guarantees by creditors can only be conducted if there is an agreement on default between the creditor and debtor or through a court ruling. Meanwhile, Constitutional Court Decision No: 2/PUU-XIX/2021 reinforces debtor protection by ensuring an objection mechanism during the execution process. The analysis reveals that these decisions have shifted the orientation of fiduciary guarantee executions from being creditor-centric to a more balanced approach that considers debtor rights. However, this shift introduces challenges, including potential delays and increased execution costs. Therefore, comprehensive regulatory reform is necessary to ensure legal certainty for creditors while protecting debtor rights. In conclusion, the Constitutional Court Decisions represent significant legal reforms in fiduciary guarantee executions. However, regulatory harmonization is still required to achieve a balance between legal certainty for creditors and fairness for debtors."

"[Kewajiban pendaftaran fidusia oleh perusahaan pembiayaan yang termuat dalam PMK No. 130/PMK 010/2012 pendaftaran harus dilakukan maksimal 30 hari setelah perjanjian pembiayaan ditandatangani. Kewajiban pendaftaran jaminan fidusia juga berlaku bagi pembiayaan konsumen kendaraan bermotor berdasarkan prinsip syariah dan/atau pembiayaan konsumen kendaraan bermotor yang pembiayaannya berasal dari pembiayaan penerusan (channeling) atau pembiayaan bersama (joint financing). Kepastian hukum jaminan fidusia erat kaitannya dengan pendaftaran fidusia. Proses pendaftaran sertifikat fidusia yang membutuhkan waktu yang lama kini tidak akan terjadi lagi dengan dimunculkannya sistem pendaftaran jaminan fidusia online. Melalui sistem ini, pendaftaran fidusia menjadi lebih cepat, akurat, dan bebas pungutan liar dan mendorong peningkatan pendapatan negara dari sektor penerimaan negara bukan pajak (PNBP). Pendaftaran jaminan fidusia oleh perusahaan pembiayaan menjadi suatu kewajiban dalam rangka pemenuhan asas publisitas dan untuk memberikan hak preferensi bagi penerima fidusia. Jadi melalui fasilitas pendaftaran jaminan fidusia yang disediakan oleh pemerintah, diharapkan kepastian hukum dalam Undang-Undang Jaminan Fidusia dapat terpenuhi sesuai dengan tujuan dibentuknya Undang-Undang Jaminan Fidusia yang antara lain adalah untuk memenuhi kebutuhan hukum masyarakat, untuk menjamin kepastian hukum dan untuk memberikan perlindungan kepada pihak-pihak yang berkepentingan.

---

Registration of fiduciary by financing companies according to PMK No. 130 / PMK 010/2012 registration must be made up to 30 days after signing the financing agreement. Registration fiduciary also applies to motor vehicle consumer financing based on Islamic principles and / or financing consumer financing motor vehicles originating from financing forwarding (channeling) or cofinancing (joint financing). Legal certainty is closely related to fiduciary registration. The registration process fiduciary certificates that require a long time now not going to happen again with fiduciary online registration system. Through this system, the registration of fiduciary becomes more rapid, accurate, and free extortion and boost state revenues from the sector of non-tax revenues (non-tax). Registration fiduciary by the finance company become an obligation in order to fulfill the principle of publicity and to give preference for the recipient fiduciary rights. So through a fiduciary guarantee registration facilities provided by the government, expected legal certainty in Law Fiduciary can be met in accordance with the purpose of establishing the Fiduciary Law, among others, is to meet the legal needs of the community, to ensure legal certainty and to provide protection to interested parties.

;Registration of fiduciary by financing companies according to PMK No. 130 / PMK 010/2012 registration must be made up to 30 days after signing the financing agreement. Registration fiduciary also applies to motor vehicle consumer financing based on Islamic principles and / or financing consumer financing motor vehicles originating from financing forwarding (channeling) or cofinancing (joint financing). Legal certainty is closely related to fiduciary registration. The registration process fiduciary certificates that require a long time now not going to happen again with fiduciary online registration system. Through this system, the registration of fiduciary becomes more rapid, accurate, and free extortion and boost state revenues from the sector of non-tax revenues (non-tax). Registration fiduciary by the finance company become an obligation in order to fulfill the principle of publicity and to give preference for the recipient fiduciary rights. So through a fiduciary guarantee registration facilities provided by the government, expected legal certainty in Law Fiduciary can be met in accordance with the purpose of establishing the Fiduciary Law, among others, is to meet the legal needs of the community, to ensure legal certainty and to provide protection to interested parties.

, Registration of fiduciary by financing companies according to PMK No. 130 / PMK 010/2012 registration must be made up to 30 days after signing the financing agreement. Registration fiduciary also applies to motor vehicle consumer financing based on Islamic principles and / or financing consumer financing motor vehicles originating from financing forwarding (channeling) or cofinancing (joint financing). Legal certainty is closely related to fiduciary registration. The registration process fiduciary certificates that require a long time now not going to happen again with fiduciary online registration system. Through this system, the registration of fiduciary becomes more rapid, accurate, and free extortion and boost state revenues from the sector of non-tax revenues (non-tax). Registration fiduciary by the finance company become an obligation in order to fulfill the principle of publicity and to give preference for the recipient fiduciary rights. So through a fiduciary guarantee registration facilities provided by the government, expected legal certainty in Law Fiduciary can be met in accordance with the purpose of establishing the Fiduciary Law, among others, is to meet the legal needs of the community, to ensure legal certainty and to provide protection to interested parties.

]"

"ABSTRAKLahirnya Undang-undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia di Indonesia, mengatur mengenai pendaftaran jaminan fidusia guna memberikan kepastian hukum kepada para pihak yang berkepentingan dan pendaftaran Jaminan fidusia memberikan hak didahulukan (preferen) kepada penerima fidusia terhadap kreditur lain. Untuk menjamin kepastian hukum bagi kreditur maka dibuatkan akta oleh Notaris dan didaftarkan ke kantor pendaftaran fidusia, yang nantinya kreditur akan memperoleh sertifikat jaminan fidusia berirah-irah "Demi Keadilan Berdasarkan Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa" yang memiliki kekuatan hak eksekutorial langsung (parate eksekusi) apabila debitur lalai atau melakukan pelanggaran perjanjian fidusia kepada kreditur berdasarkan Undang-undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 Tentang Jaminan Fidusia. Persoalan yang akan muncul ketika harus dilakukan eksekusi terhadap objek fidusia yang tidak dibuatkan akta Notaris dan tidak didaftarkan di Kantor pendaftaran fidusia sehingga sertifikat jaminan fidusia yang memiliki kekuatan eksekutorial seperti halnya keputusan hakim yang mempunyai kekuatan hukum tetap tidak dapat diterbitkan. Skripsi ini membahas mengenai perlindungan hukum bagi kreditur terhadap benda objek perjanjian fidusia dalam akta jaminan fidusia dan akibat hukum dalam tindakan parate eksekusi atas objek jaminan yang dijaminkan melalui perjanjian fidusia di bawah tangan. Penelitian ini bersifat yuridis normatif, menggunakan alat pengumpulan data studi dokumen. Dalam pengolahan data digunakan metode kualitatif yang menghasilkan penelitian bersifat deskriptif analitis. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa proses eksekusi terhadap jaminan fidusia yang dibuat di bawah tangan hanya bisa dilakukan melalui pengadilan karena tidak adanya kekuatan eksekutorial di dalam akta jaminan tersebut. Oleh karena itu, kreditur tidak bisa melakukan eksekusi langsung (parate eksekusi) atas objek jaminan tersebut tanpa diperolehnya terlebih dahulu putusan pengadilan yang telah berkekuatan hukum tetap.

---

ABSTRACT

The enactment of the Law Number 42 Year 1999 on the Fiduciary Guarantee in Indonesia, regulates on the registration of the fiduciary guarantee in order to give a legal certainty to the parties that have interest and the registration of the fiduciary guarantee gives a preference right to the fiduciary receiver to the other creditor. In order to guarantee legal certainty to the creditor, therefore the notary deed is made and registered to the fiduciary registration office, then the creditor will receive the fiduciary guarantee certificate as an executorial title "For the Justice on the Almighty God" that has an direct executorial right (parate execution) if the debtor defaults or commits breach on the fiduciary agreement to the creditor based on the Law Number 42 Year 1999 on the Fiduciary Guarantee. The matter that will incur when the execution is performed on the fiduciary object that does not have the notary deed and is not registered to the fiduciary registration office, therefore the fiduciary guarantee certificate that has an executorial power such as the judgment that has legally binding power may not be issued. This thesis is on the legal protection for creditor on the object of fiduciary agreement in the fiduciary guarantee deed and the legal consequence in the parate execution on the guaranteed object through the unofficial fiduciary agreement. This research is juridical normative in nature, by using the document data collection tool. In the data processing, it is used the qualitative method that produce the descriptive analytical research. The result of this research showed that the execution process on the fiduciary guarantee that made unofficial is only performed through the court because there is no executorial power in the concerned guarantee deed. Therefore, the creditor may not perform direct execution (parate execution) on the concerned guarantee object without obtain the court judgment that has legally binding power."

"Dalam kehidupan sehari-hari, keperluan akan dana guna menggerakkan roda perekonomian dirasakan semakin meningkat. Di satu sisi ada masyarakat yang kelebihan dana, tetapi tidak memiliki kemampuan untuk mengusahakannya, dan di sisi lain ada kelompok masyarakat lain yang memiliki kemampuan untuk berusaha namun terhambat pada kendala karena hanya memiliki sedikit atau bahkan tidak memiliki dana sama sekali. Disinilah pentingnya lembaga Bank yang berperan sebagai perantara keuangan yang amat vital untuk menunjang kelancaran perekonomian. Sebagai lembaga penyedia dana, salah satu peran bank adalah memberikan kredit bagi debitur yang membutuhkan. Dalam pemberian kredit, bank mensyaratkan adanya jaminan. Salah satu bentuk jaminan adalah Fidusia. Keunikan dari instrumen Jaminan Fidusia adalah tetap diberikannya hak kepada Pemberi Fidusia sebagai pemilik jaminan untuk menguasai secara fisik barang yang dijaminkan, walaupun secara hukum, kepemilikannya beralih kepada kreditur selaku Penerima Fidusia. Sebagai bentuk jaminan yang ideal, salah satu ciri lembaga Jaminan Fidusia adalah mudah dan pasti dalam pelaksanaan eksekusinya. Apabila debitur cidera janji atau wanprestasi, Undang-undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia memberikan keistimewaan kepada Bank untuk melakukan Parate Eksekusi atas obyek Jaminan Fidusia. Parate eksekusi adalah melakukan sendiri eksekusi tanpa bantuan atau campur tangan pengadilan atau hakim. Dalam tesis ini, Penulis menjelaskan praktek pelaksanaan Parate Eksekusi Jaminan Fidusia dan hambatan-hambatan yang timbul dalam pelaksanaannya di Bank ABC.

---

In daily life, the need for funds to move the wheels of the economy perceived increasing. There are some people who have excess fund, but do not have ability to invest that excess fund. On the other hand, there are also some people they have ability to invest, but they have limited fund or not fund at all. This is why we need the Bank institution that act as financial intermediaries to bridge those two groups people. Bank, as a lender of fund has in perform roles to provide to borrower who need it. The Bank requires collateral before lend the money to borrower. One form of collateral that accepted by the Bank is Fiduciary Transfer of Proprietary Right (FTO). The uniqueness of the FTO , the ownership of the physical goods still belong to the borrower, eventhough according the law, the ownership of the physical goods has been transferred to the lender. The process of enforcement of FTO are not complicate and guaranteed. This is an ideal of FTO. If the borrower is guilty of breaching of contract, Bank has privileges to do self enforcement (?Parate Eksekusi?) over the collateral according Act Nr 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Transfer of Proprietary Right (FTO). Self enforcement (?Parate Eksekusi?) is defined as an instant enforcement for civil debt without a judicial decision or a judge?s order. In this thesis, the author describes the practical implementation of the FTO?s self enforcement by Bank ABC and the obstacles that arises from the process."

"Dikeluarkannya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 tentang pengujian UU Jaminan Fidusia Pasal 15 ayat 2 dan 3 memberi penafsiran baru terhadap beberapa frasa dan penjelasannya dalam UU Fidusia, di mana hal ini memberikan implikasi terhadap proses eksekusi jaminan fidusia. Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk menelaah dampak dari putusan MK terhadap perusahaan pembiayaan X dengan melihat tiga hal yakni: a) proses eksekusi jaminan fidusia di Perusahaan Pembiayaan X sebelum adanya putusan MK b) pengaruh Putusan MK terhadap proses eksekusi jaminan fidusia di Perusahaan Pembiayaan ; c) kendala-kendala yang dilalui Perusahaan Pembiayaan X setelah adanya Putusan MK. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian social legal dengan pendekatan kualitatif, penulis menemukan bahwa meskipun proses eksekusi jaminan fidusia kendaraan bermotor di perusahaan X tidak berubah, namun terdapat perubahan terkait pemaknaan dokumen.

---

The issuance of the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019 regarding the review of the Fiduciary Law Article 15 paragraphs 2 and 3 provides a new interpretation of several phrases and explanations in the Fiduciary Law, where this has implications for the process of executing fiduciary collaterals. This paper aims to examine the impact of the Constitutional Court's decision on financing company X by looking at three things, namely: a) the process of executing fiduciary collaterals at Financing Company X prior to the Court's decision b) the effect of the Constitutional Court's decision on the process of executing fiduciary collateral in Financing Companies; c) the obstacles faced by Financing Company X after the Constitutional Court's Decision. By using the social legal research method with a qualitative approach, the authors found that although the process of executing motor vehicle fiduciary collaterals in Company X did not change, there were changes related to the meaning of the document"

"[Skripsi ini menjelaskan akibat hukum dari pengalihan objek jaminan fidusiaserta upaya hukum yang dapat dilakukan oleh kreditur terhadap objek jaminan fidusiayang telah dialihkan kepada pihak lain secara sepihak. Selain itu, dijelaskan pulaakibat hukum dari adanya cidera janji debitur. Pengalihan ini dilakukan berulangkalike beberapa pihak lain dari waktu ke waktu untuk melanjutkan pelunasan debiturlama tanpa sepengetahuan krediturnya. Tujuan penulisan ini untuk mengetahui akibatdan kewajiban hukum dari perbuatan tersebut. Berdasarkan penelitian ini diketahuiberbagai permasalahan kurangnya perlindungan hukum dan kepastian hukum yangterdapat dalam undang-undang jaminan fidusia yang diberikan kepada para pihakdalam proses jaminan fidusia.;This thesis explains about the legal consequences arising from the transfer offiduciary collateral object and the legal remedies which could be brought by thecreditor on regards of fiduciary collateral objects which has already transferred toanother party one-sidedly. Besides, it also explains the legal consequences of thedefault made by the debtor(s). The transfer of fiduciary collateral objects is donecontinuously to many other parties several times in order to carry on the repayment ofthe debt from the previous debtor without giving any notice to the creditor. Thepurpose of this thesis is to elaborate the impacts and legal basis of consequences fromthe default caused by the giver of fiduciary which has made the one sided transfer offiduciary collateral object. From this research, we could recognize various problemarising from the lack of legal safeguarding and the legal consequences which arefound in the Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary given to the parties infiduciary system., This thesis explains about the legal consequences arising from the transfer offiduciary collateral object and the legal remedies which could be brought by thecreditor on regards of fiduciary collateral objects which has already transferred toanother party one-sidedly. Besides, it also explains the legal consequences of thedefault made by the debtor(s). The transfer of fiduciary collateral objects is donecontinuously to many other parties several times in order to carry on the repayment ofthe debt from the previous debtor without giving any notice to the creditor. Thepurpose of this thesis is to elaborate the impacts and legal basis of consequences fromthe default caused by the giver of fiduciary which has made the one sided transfer offiduciary collateral object. From this research, we could recognize various problemarising from the lack of legal safeguarding and the legal consequences which arefound in the Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary given to the parties infiduciary system.]"

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai perlindungan hukum bagi penerima fidusia apabila terjadinya wanprestasi atas suatu perjanjian fidusia berdasarkan Undang Undang Jaminan Fidusia, akibat hukum bagi Pihak Ketiga mengajukan sita eksekusi atas objek jaminan fidusia, serta perlindungan hukum bagi pemberi fidusia atas permohonan sita eksekusi yang diajukan oleh Pihak Ketiga berdasarkan pertimbangan Mahkamah Agung dalam memutus perkara yang berkaitan. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif. Hasil penelitian adalah apabila pemberi fidusia melakukan wanprestasi maka penerima fidusia dapat melakukan sita eksekusi, penjualan dibawah tangan dan pelelangan atas objek jaminan fidusia, dan apabila Pihak Ketiga mengajukan permohonan sita eksekusi atas benda yang bukan miliknya, maka perbuatan tersebut merupakan perubatan melawan hukum. 

---

This thesis discusses about the legal protection for fiduciary reciever should there be any default of fiduciary agreement arrises pursuant to the Fiduciary Act; the legal consequences for the third party who file the executorial seizure of the fiduciary object; and the legal protection for the fiduciary giver of the executorial seizure filed by the third party based on the Supreme Court consideration in making decision for the related dispute. This thesis uses an analytical methode through approach of normative juridis. The result shows that if there is any default conducted by the fiduciary giver, therefore the fiduciary giver may process the executorial seizure and conduct the under hand sale and purchase agreement and auction for the fiduciary object. Furthermore, if the third party files the executorial seizure request for the objects that do not belong to them, then the party has conducted an unlawful act."

"Hak tanggungan merupakan salah satu jenis jaminan yang digunakan sebagai jaminan pada pemberian fasilitas kredit, yang ketentuannya dituangkan dalam perjanjian jaminan. Dalam hal ini, aset debitur yang digunakan sebagai jaminan adalah hak atas dan dapat berupa bangunan, tanaman, dan hasil karya yang sudah ada ataupun akan ada yang merupakan satu kesatuan pada tanah tersebut. Ketentuan mengenai bangunan, tanaman, dan hasil karya di atas tanah milik debitur harus dinyatakan dengan tegas dalam Akta Pemberian Hak Tanggungan tersebut. Dalam penelitian ini, penulis bertujuan untuk meninjau lebih lanjut mengenai bagaimana bentuk perlindungan dan upaya hukum bagi debitur dalam permasalahan terkait lelang eksekusi yang dilakukan oleh kreditur sebagai penjual dengan penetapan nilai limit yang tidak wajar atau rendah, sebab dengan adanya ketentuan mengenai nilai limit dalam Peraturan Menteri Keuangan tentang Petunjuk Pelaksanaan Lelang Nomor 122 Tahun 2023 dan ketentuan eksekusi dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 1996 tentang Hak Tanggungan, bisa memberikan kedudukan yang seimbang dan adil dalam pelaksanaan lelang eksekusi.

---

Mortgage is one type of collateral used as security for the provision of credit facilities, the provisions of which are set out in a security agreement. In this case, the debtor's assets used as collateral are rights to and can be in the form of existing or future buildings, plants, and works that form an integral part of the land. The provisions regarding buildings, plants, and works on the debtor's land must be expressly stated in the Deed of Granting Mortgage. In this study, the author aims to further review how the form of protection and legal remedies for debtors in problems related to execution auctions conducted by creditors as sellers with the determination of unreasonable or low limit values, because with the provisions regarding the limit value in the Minister of Finance Regulation concerning Auction Implementation Guidelines Number 122 of 2023 and the provisions of execution in Law Number 4 of 1996 concerning Mortgage Rights, can provide a balanced and fair position in the implementation of execution auctions."