Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Tesis ini membahas tentang hukum Jaminan Perorangan yang menjadi jaminan dalam praktik pembiayaan yang berlaku di Indonesia. Ketentuan yang mengatur mengenai Jaminan Perorangan terdapat dalam Pasal 1820-1850 KUHPerdata. Jaminan Perorangan merupakan perjanjian yang diberikan oleh pihak ketiga untuk memenuhi kewajiban debitur jika debitur wanprestasi. Permasalahan dalam tesis ini adalah upaya hukum perusahaan pembiayaan dalam menyelesaikan fasilitas pembiayaan dengan jaminan perorangan yang macet, pelaksanaan eksekusi jaminan perorangan pada perjanjian penanggungan dan akibat hukum dari pengesampingan hak-hak istimewa penjamin yang diatur dalam KUHPerdata dalam perjanjian penanggungan berdasarkan Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat Nomor 44/PDT.G/2019/PN Jkt Pst. Dalam rangka untuk melakukan penelitian ini, tipologi penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian preskriptif. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah perusahaan pembiayaan akan mengupayakan penyelesaian pembiayaan macet melalui penyelesaian secara musyawarah mufakat untuk dapat mengeksekusi jaminan perorangan. Apabila tidak terdapat penyelesaian, maka perusahaan pembiayaan dapat melakukan upaya hukum penyelesaian melalui pengadilan agar dapat menyatakan perjanjian fasilitas pembiayaan tersebut wanprestasi dan eksekusi jaminan perorangan yang telah diberikan oleh penjamin. Jenis pelaksanaan eksekusi terhadap Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat nomor 44/PDT.G/2019/PN Jkt Pst yaitu eksekusi untuk membayar sejumlah uang untuk pemenuhan pembayaran utang. Jika pelaksanaan putusan tidak dilaksanakan secara sukarela, maka proses eksekusi yang dapat dilakukan adalah (i) permohonan eksekusi, (ii) teguran, (iii) sita eksekusi terhadap harta kekayaan penjamin. Lebih lanjut, pengesampingan hak-hak istimewa penjamin yang diatur dalam KUHPerdata bertujuan agar memudahkan kreditur untuk dapat menagih penjamin apabila debitur wanprestasi.

---

This thesis discusses the law of the Personal Guarantee which is a security in financing practices which applied in Indonesia. The provisions governing the Personal Guarantee are regulated in Articles 1820-1850 of the Civil Code. Personal Guarantee is an agreement given by a third party to fulfill the debtor's obligations if the debtor defaults. This problems in this thesis are the legal efforts of financing companies in completing non-performing financing facilities with personal guarantees, analysis of the execution of personal guarantees and the legal consequences of waiving the guarantor's privileges which regulated in the Civil Code in the guarantee agreement based on the Decision of the Central Jakarta District Court Number 44/PDT.G/2019/PN Jkt Pst. In order to conduct this research, the research typology used is prescriptive research. The result of this research is that financing companies will strive to resolve non-performing financing through deliberation to reach a consensus to be able to execute individual guarantees. If there is no settlement, then the financing company can take legal remedies through the court to declare the financing facility agreement in default and the execution of the individual guarantee provided by the guarantor. The type of execution of the Central Jakarta District Court Decision number 44/PDT.G/2019/PN Jkt Pst namely execution to pay an amount of money to fulfill debt payments. If the implementation of the decision is not carried out voluntarily, then the execution process that can be carried out is (i) request for execution, (ii) warning, (iii) seizure of execution of the assets of the guarantor. Furthermore, the waiver of the special rights of the guarantor regulated in the Civil Code aims to facilitate the creditor to be able to collect the guarantor if the debtor is in default."

"[ABSTRAKTesis ini membahas tentang pelaksanaan eksekusi jaminan melalui lelang yangdilaksanakan oleh PT Bank Mega Tbk Bandung sebagai penyelesaian kreditbermasalah.Tujuan dilakukannya penulisan Tesis ini adalah untuk mengetahui danmenganalisa prosedur eksekusi lelang jaminan yang dilakukan oleh PT Bank MegaTbk Bandung, juga untuk mengetahui mengenai prosedur penetapan harga limitbarang jaminan yang merupakan nilai limit untuk suatu pelelangan jaminan. Penelitianini menggunakan metode deskriptif analitis yang melukiskan fakta-fakta hukum yangada dan di hubungkan dengan hukum jaminan khususnya jaminan kebendaan dalamperjanjian kredit di perbankan. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian yang dilakukan, Penulisdapat mengetahui bahwa meskipun terdapat kendala dalam pelaksanaan prakteeksekusi Hak Tanggungan yang dilakukan oleh PT Bank Mega Tbk Bandung, namunpratek eksukusi HakTanggungan dapat berperan baik dalam menyelesaikan kreditbermasalah. Penulis juga menyimpulkan bahwa terdapat inkonsistensi pengaturandalam praktek eksekusi Hak Tanggungan dalam Undang-Undang Hak Tanggungan.Berdasarkan hasil penelitian yang dilakukan, Penulis menyarankan agar pihakpembuat undang-undang membuat peraturan pelaksanaan dari Undang-Undang HakTanggungan agar peraturan ini lebih memberikan kepastian hukum dan juga menjadiperaturan yang lebih efektif. Penulis juga melakukan penelitian mengenai prosedurpenetapan limit barang jaminan, di mana dalamkasus ini, pihak debitor mengalamikerugian akibat penetapan harganya dibawah harga pasar wajar. Penulis jugamenyimpulkan bahwa pembentukkan nilai limit dipengaruhi oleh beberapa faktoryang cukuppenting, seperti penunjukkan kantor penilai yang independen, penggunaanmedia dalam pengumuman lelang dan tatacara pelelangan. Penulis juga berkesimpulanbahwa kedudukan kreditor yang sangat kuat, sering kali menempatkan debitor dalamkedudukan yang tidakseimbang. Peranan pemerintah dalam pembuatan undangundangyang dapat melindungi keduabelah pihak, sangatlah ditunggu oleh masyarakat

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis focuses and analyzes the implementation of the self-enforcement of HakTanggungan carried out by PT Bank Mega, Tbk, Bandung, as an alternative settlementof non-performing loan. The purposes of this thesis are to investigate and analyze therole of the self-enforcement of Hak Tanggungan in resolving non-performing loan. Italso focuses on obstacles encountered, and analyzis the consistency of selfenforcement arrangements in Indonesia Law of HakTanggungan . This thesis is usinganalytical descriptive study that describes the legal fact relating to security lawespecially for material in credit agreement in banking. Based on the result of researchconducted, the Author is able to know that although there are obstacles in theimplementation of the self-enforcement of Hak Tanggungan by PT Bank Mega TbkBandung, the self-enforcementof Hak Tanggungan play a significant role in solvingthe non-performing loans. The Author also concluded that there is inconsistency ofself-enforcement arrangement in Indonesian Law of Hak Tanggungan. Based on theresultof the research, the Author suggests that the government should make detailregulation to implement the law of Hak Tanggungan. This could increase the legalcertainty of the process and to the all parties that involved in the process. Anotherinteresting point in this thesis is about the reserve price collateral value, which in thiscase, the debtor suffered losses due to pricing below market price. It is also concludedthat the minimum value formation is influenced by several factors, such as theappointment of an independent valuer, the use of media in the auction advertisementand procedures for the auction. The authors also concluded that the position ofcreditors is very strong, often putting debtors in a weaker position. In this respect therole of government and law maker in making fairer and more balance regulation isneeded in order to protect both parties., This thesis focuses and analyzes the implementation of the self-enforcement of HakTanggungan carried out by PT Bank Mega, Tbk, Bandung, as an alternative settlementof non-performing loan. The purposes of this thesis are to investigate and analyze therole of the self-enforcement of Hak Tanggungan in resolving non-performing loan. Italso focuses on obstacles encountered, and analyzis the consistency of selfenforcement arrangements in Indonesia Law of HakTanggungan . This thesis is usinganalytical descriptive study that describes the legal fact relating to security lawespecially for material in credit agreement in banking. Based on the result of researchconducted, the Author is able to know that although there are obstacles in theimplementation of the self-enforcement of Hak Tanggungan by PT Bank Mega TbkBandung, the self-enforcementof Hak Tanggungan play a significant role in solvingthe non-performing loans. The Author also concluded that there is inconsistency ofself-enforcement arrangement in Indonesian Law of Hak Tanggungan. Based on theresultof the research, the Author suggests that the government should make detailregulation to implement the law of Hak Tanggungan. This could increase the legalcertainty of the process and to the all parties that involved in the process. Anotherinteresting point in this thesis is about the reserve price collateral value, which in thiscase, the debtor suffered losses due to pricing below market price. It is also concludedthat the minimum value formation is influenced by several factors, such as theappointment of an independent valuer, the use of media in the auction advertisementand procedures for the auction. The authors also concluded that the position ofcreditors is very strong, often putting debtors in a weaker position. In this respect therole of government and law maker in making fairer and more balance regulation isneeded in order to protect both parties.]"

"Terbitnya Putusan MK No.2/PUU-XIV/2021 telah menjadi acuan baru debitur dan kreditur yang terlibat dengan persoalan eksekusi jaminan fidusia akibat dari adanya wanprestasi. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui dan menganalisis disparitas putusan hakim terkait proses eksekusi objek jaminan fidusia berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia Pasca Putusan MK No.2/PUU-XIX/2021. Penelitian yang menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach) dan pendekatan kasus (Case Approach), tipe penelitian hukum bersifat normatif (normative legal research), dan Analisis bahan hukum menggunakan analisis deskriptif kualitatif. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 2/PPU-XIX/2021 menegaskan bahwa eksekusi sertifikat jaminan fidusia melalui Pengadilan Negeri hanya sebuah alternative, dan menjadikan titel eksekutorial sertifikat jaminan fidusia tidak serta merta mempunyai kekuatan hukum tetap pada keadaan tertentu. Hingga terdapat disparitas putusan hakim terkait eksekusi objek jaminan fidusia pasca putusan MK tersebut. Maka terlihat masih belum adanya kepastian hukum bagi kreditur pasca putusan MK. Maka dengan itu perlunya ada surat edaran Mahkamah Agung dalam menyikapi Putusan MK Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 dan Nomor 2/PUU-XIX/2021 sebagai bahan pertimbangan oleh Majelis Hakim dalam memutus perkara eksekusi jaminan fidusia, sehingga dapat menghindari terjadinya disparitas Putusan kedepannya. Diperlukan peraturan pelaksanaan atas Undang-Undang Jaminan Fidusia untuk mengakomidir terkait eksekusi jaminan fidusia sesuai dengan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 dan Nomor 2/PUU-XIX/2021 sehingga dapat memberikan kepastian hukum bagi debitur dan kreditur terkait tata cara eksekusi jaminan fidusia dan tidak membuat salah satu pihak kesulitan dalam terjadinya eksekusi jaminan fidusia. Terlebih dengan tidak jelasnya mengenai penentuan cidera janji sehingga memperlambat proses eksekusi objek jaminan fidusia.

---

issuance of Constitutional Court Decision No.2/PUU-XIV/2021 has become a new reference for debtors and creditors involved in the issue of the execution of fiduciary guarantees due to default. This study aims to determine and analyze the disparity in judges' decisions regarding the process of executing fiduciary security objects based on Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees after Constitutional Court Decision No.2/PUU-XIX/2021. This research uses a statutory approach (statute approach), the type of legal research is normative (normative legal research), and the analysis of legal materials uses qualitative descriptive analysis. Constitutional Court Decision Number 2/PPU-XIX/2021 confirms that the execution of a fiduciary security certificate through the District Court is only an alternative, and makes the executorial title of the fiduciary security certificate not necessarily have permanent legal force in certain circumstances. Until there is a disparity in judges' decisions regarding the execution of fiduciary security objects after the Constitutional Court's decision. So it appears that there is still no legal certainty for creditors after the Constitutional Court's decision. Therefore, there is a need for a Supreme Court circular letter in response to the Constitutional Court Decisions Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019 and Number 2/PUU-XIX/2021 as a material consideration by the Panel of Judges in deciding cases of fiduciary guarantee execution, to avoid disparity in future decisions. An implementing regulation is needed for the Fiduciary Guarantee Law to accommodate the execution of fiduciary guarantees by the Constitutional Court Decisions Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019 and Number 2/PUU-XIX/2021 to provide legal certainty for debtors and creditors regarding the procedures for executing fiduciary guarantees and not make it difficult for one party to execute fiduciary guarantees. Moreover, the lack of clarity regarding the determination of a breach of promise slows down the process of executing a fiduciary security object."

"Pada Pelaksanaan Penyaluran Pembiayaan Dalam Perbankan Syariah dapat terjadi Permasalahan. Ketika terjadi permasalahan tersebut, penyelesaiannya dapat dilakukan melalui eksekusi jaminan. Melalui penelitian yang bersifat yurudis normatif, dapat diketahui bahwa Bank Syariah selain dapat melakukan eksekusi jaminan sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang-undang Nomor 4 Tahun 1996 tentang Hak Tanggungan dan Undang-undang nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia, dapat pula membeli sebagian atau seluruh agunan baik melalui atau diluar pelelangan berdasarkan penyerahan secara sukarela dari pemilik agunan dan agunan yang dibeli oleh Bank Syariah tersebut wajib dicairkan dalam waktu 1 (satu) tahun atau yang dikenal dengan Agunan Yang Diambil Alih.

---

In the implementation of cost distribution of Islamic Banking, could be having problem. When the problem is happened, the solution could be taken is guarantee execution. Based on the normative juridical research, it can be understand that Islamic Bank could conduct the guarantee execution that under regulation of Law Number 4 Year 1996 about Mortgage and Law Number 42 Year 1999 about Guarantee of Fiduciary, but also this Islamic Bank could buy a part or the entire bond with or without auction, based on the free given from the guarantee owner and the guarantee that is already bought by the Islamic Bank have to pay in the period time of 1 (one) year that called the over taken guarantee."

"Ketentuan Pasal 15 UU 42/1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia khususnya yang mengatur mengenai frasa “kekuatan eksekutorial”, menimbulkan berbagai permasalahan terkait dengan pelaksanaan eksekusi jaminan fidusia. Adanya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang mengabulkan sebagian permohonan para Pemohon mengenai ketentuan eksekusi jaminan fidusia, dimana kekuatan eksekutorial hanya dapat dijalankan apabila terdapat kesepakatan antara debitur dan kreditur bahwa debitur telah melakukan cidera janji, dan apabila tidak ada kesepatan dan debitur keberatan menyerahkan secara sukarela objek jaminan fidusia maka segala mekanisme pelaksanaan eksekusi harus dilakukan melalui Pengadilan. Putusan tersebut menarik perhatian Penulis untuk meneliti bagaimanakah pelaksanaan eksekusi jaminan fidusia di Bank BNI Syariah sebelum dan sesudah putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019. Untuk itu agar dapat memecahkan permasalahan ini, penulis menggunakan bentuk penelitian yuridis normatif yang bersifat deskriptif analitis, dan didukung oleh data sekunder. Selain itu, penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dalam menganalisa data yang diperoleh dari studi literatur dan hasil wawancara. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian tersebut, disimpulkan bahwa putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dapat berdampak pada jalannya bisnis pembiayaan, oleh sebab kreditur harus lebih selektif dalam memberikan pembiayaan kepada calon debitur guna mencegah adanya “debitur nakal” yang berusaha berlindung atau memanfaatkan ketentuan baru sehubungan dengan eksekusi jaminan fidusia dari putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi ini untuk memperoleh keuntungan.

---

The provisions of Article 15 of Law 42/1999 on Fiduciary Security, particularly those that regulate the phrase "executorial power", causes various problems related to the implementation of fiduciary security. There was a Constitutional Court Decision which partially granted the Petitioners' petition regarding the provisions for the execution of fiduciary security, where executorial power can only be exercised if there is an agreement between the debtor and creditor that the debtor has committed a breach of contract, and if there is no agreement and the debtor objected to voluntarily hand over the object of the fiduciary security then all mechanisms for carrying out the execution must be carried out through the Court. This decision attracted the attention of the author to examine how the execution of fiduciary security at Bank BNI Syariah before and after the Constitutional Court decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019. For this reason, in order to solve this problem, the author uses a form of normative juridical research which in character of descriptive analytical, and is supported by secondary data. In addition, this study uses a qualitative approach in analyzing data obtained from literature studies and interviews. Based on the results of this study, it is concluded that the Constitutional Court's decision could have an impact on the running of the financing business, because creditors must be more selective in providing financing to prospective debtors in order to prevent “bad debtors” who seek to take shelter or take advantage of the new provisions in connection with the execution of fiduciary security of decisions of this Constitutional court change of provisions."

"[ABSTRAKSkripsi ini membahas mengenai pelaksanaan eksekusi jaminan benda tetap berupa hipotik kapal laut dan hak tanggungan atas tanah dalam hal kepailitan. Pada umumnya pelaksanaan eksekusi harta pailit dilakukan oleh Kurator sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang-Undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (“UUK-PKPU”). Akan tetapi UUK-PKPU memberikan kewenangan kepada kreditur pemegang hak jaminan untuk dapat mengeksekusi haknya seolah-olah tidak terjadi kepailitan, dimana ketentuan Pasal tersebut sejalan dengan diakuinya hak separatis dari pemegang jaminan sebagaimana diatur dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata. Dalam pelaksanaan eksekusi hipotik kapal laut dalam kepailitan PT Putrajaya Offshore Lines dan pelaksanaan eksekusi hak tanggungan atas tanah dalam kepailitan PT Kepsonic Indonesia, masing-masing pelaksanaan eksekusinya memiliki hambatan dan resiko tersendiri. Hambatan dan resiko tersebut patut untuk diulas lebih mendalam dikarenakan kedua obyek jaminan tersebut merupakan obyek yang sering dijadikan jaminan pelunasan utang kepada bank dan dapat ditemui dalam beberapa kasus kepailitan. Untuk itu penulis akan meneliti bagaimana pelaksanaan eksekusi benda tetap dan hambatan-hambatan yang dimiliki dalam kasus kepailitan PT Putrajaya Offshore Lines dan kasus kepailitan PT Kepsonic Indonesia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian kepustakaan yang bersifat yuridis normatif. Dari hasil penelitian, penulis mendapatkan bahwa pelaksanaan eksekusi jaminan benda tetap berupa hipotik kapal laut dan hak tanggungan atas tanah, masing-masing memiliki resikonya tersendiri sehingga kreditur pemegang jaminan perlu memperhitungkan potensi ancaman dan resiko yang dapat muncul dalam pelaksanaan eksekusi tersebut, sebelum memutuskan untuk melakukan eksekusi sendiri dengan pembatasan-pembatasan sebagaimana diatur dalam UUK-PKPU atau melalui kurator.

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis discusses about the execution of fixed objects securities in the form of hypothec over ships and security right over lands in the event of bankruptcy. In general, curator is authorized to perform the execution of bankruptcy assets in accordance with the Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payments (“Bankruptcy Law”). However, the Bankruptcy Law gives an authority to the secured creditors to execute their rights as if the bankruptcy does not occur. In the execution of Hypothec over Ships of PT Putrajaya Offshore Lines’s bankruptcy case and the execution of security right over lands and buildings of PT Kepsonic Indonesia’s bankruptcy case, each execution has its own obstacles and risks. Such obstacles and risks are ought to be reviewed because both of security objects are often to be used as security under loan agreement with the bank and such security objects are often to be found in several bankruptcy cases. Therefore, the writer hereby researches on how the execution of the fixed assets and its obstacles in the case of PT Putrajaya Offshore Lines and PT Kepsonic Indonesia’s bankruptcy. The method of the research is using literature method based on juridical normative basis. The writer found that as the result of this research, the implementation of execution of fixed assets securities either in the form of mortgage over ships or security right over lands and buildings have its own risks and therefore the secured creditor needs to calculate the potential obstacles and risks before deciding to perform the execution by itself with the limitation as stipulated in the Bankruptcy Law or deliver it to the curator., This thesis discusses about the execution of fixed objects securities in the form of hypothec over ships and security right over lands in the event of bankruptcy. In general, curator is authorized to perform the execution of bankruptcy assets in accordance with the Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payments (“Bankruptcy Law”). However, the Bankruptcy Law gives an authority to the secured creditors to execute their rights as if the bankruptcy does not occur. In the execution of Hypothec over Ships of PT Putrajaya Offshore Lines’s bankruptcy case and the execution of security right over lands and buildings of PT Kepsonic Indonesia’s bankruptcy case, each execution has its own obstacles and risks. Such obstacles and risks are ought to be reviewed because both of security objects are often to be used as security under loan agreement with the bank and such security objects are often to be found in several bankruptcy cases. Therefore, the writer hereby researches on how the execution of the fixed assets and its obstacles in the case of PT Putrajaya Offshore Lines and PT Kepsonic Indonesia’s bankruptcy. The method of the research is using literature method based on juridical normative basis. The writer found that as the result of this research, the implementation of execution of fixed assets securities either in the form of mortgage over ships or security right over lands and buildings have its own risks and therefore the secured creditor needs to calculate the potential obstacles and risks before deciding to perform the execution by itself with the limitation as stipulated in the Bankruptcy Law or deliver it to the curator.]"

"Kebutuhan manusia yang begitu banyak sering kali tidak dapat dipenuhi dengan dana yang ia miliki sehingga manusia memerlukan suatu lembaga yang memberikan fasilitas yang bertujuan untuk memberikan dana penunjang untuk memenuhi kebutuhannya, yakni lembaga jaminan. Dalam pelaksanaannya, setiap lembaga jaminan mengatur tata cara eksekusi nya masing-masing. Hukum Indonesia yang mengenal dua lembaga jaminan yakni lembaga jaminan gadai dan fidusia, mengatur bahwa pelaksanaan eksekusi terhadap benda jaminan khususnya benda bergerak dapat dilakukan melalui lembaga parate executie yang dilakukan tanpa melibatkan proses peradilan dan rieel executie yang dilakukan melalui proses peradilan. Disini diketahui bahwa dalam pelaksanaan eksekusi benda jaminan, negara Indonesia masih melibatkan badan peradilan. Hal tersebut berbeda dengan negara Australia yang pelaksanaan eksekusi benda jaminannya tidak melibatkan badan peradilan. Di negara Australia, hak jaminan benda bergerak yang bernaung dalam satu lembaga yakni lembaga Personal Property Securities, mengatur bahwa terkait pelaksanaan eksekusi nya, para pihak dalam perjanjian penjaminan mengemban hak dan kewajibannya masing-masing berdasarkan Personal Property Securities Act 2009. Sehingga, pelaksanaannya tidak perlu melibatkan badan peradilan. Adanya perbedaan ketentuan tersebut, menjadi dasar penulis untuk melakukan perbandingan terkait pengaturan pelaksanaan eksekusi jaminan benda bergerak antara kedua negara. Dengan itu, dalam skripsi ini akan dibahas mengenai persamaan dan perbedaan pelaksanaan eksekusi lembaga jaminan benda bergerak di Indonesia dan Australia berikut dengan penjelasan umum terkait hukum jaminan yang berlaku di kedua negara. 

---

Human need often can not be fulfilled because of the limited amount of funds they have, therefore humans need an institution that provides facilities that aim to provide supporting funds to meet their needs, such as security institution.  In practice, every security institution regulates the procedure of its own execution. Indonesia security law, provides two types of security in personal property which is pawn and fiduciary guarantee, both types of security regulate that the execution of collateral can be enforce through parate executie and rieel executie. Enforcing collateral through parate executie does not requaries the court act , while the implementation of rieel executie is involving the court decision. Thus, it is known that the execution of collateral in Indonesian still involves the court act. In the other side, execution of personal property in Australia security law does not involve the court. In Australia, security interest in personal property regulated under one institusion, namely Personal Property Securities. Under the Personal Property Securities, execution of personal property can be enforced by the parties in the security agreement by complying the rights and obligations regulated under Personal Property Securities Act 2009. As a result, the execution of collateral in Australia security law does not requires the court act. The difference in these provisions becomes the basis for the author to make a comparisons related to the execution of personal property between the two countries. Therefore, this thesis will discuss the similarities and differences in the execution of personal property security in Indonesia and Australia along with general explanation related to the security law in both countries. "

"Putusan MK 18/PUU-XVII/2019 membuat sertifikat fidusia menjadi tidak memiliki kekuatan eksekutorial lagi dan melemahkan sertifikat fidusia. Hal ini tidak sejalan dengan Pasal 119 Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 4 Tahun 2023 tentang Pengembangan dan Penguatan Sektor Keuangan yang menjelaskan bahwa jaminan fidusia yang diterima oleh penyelenggara Usaha Jasa Pembiayaan sebagai jaminan dalam rangka pemenuhan kewajiban konsumen sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Undang-undang mengenai jaminan fidusia memiliki kekuatan eksekutorial. Putusan MK 18/PUU-XVII/2019 juga memberikan kesempatan bagi debitur untuk melakukan pembelaan dan menunda eksekusi atas sertifikat fidusia. Kekuatan eksekutorial sertifikat fidusia yang melalui jalur pengadilan juga dapat menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan spesifikasi penelitian deskriptif analitis. Dari hasil penelitian ini diperoleh kesimpulan yaitu penerapan Asas Kemanfaatan dalam Putusan MK 18/PUU/XVII/2019 memberikan perlindungan yang lebih kuat bagi debitur sehingga menimbulkan tantangan dan konsekuensi bagi perusahaan pembiayaan. Mereka harus menyesuaikan strategi dan proses bisnis mereka dengan persyaratan baru yang diatur oleh Putusan MK 18/PUU-XVII/2019, yang mungkin mempengaruhi efisiensi dan kemampuan mereka dalam menangani kasus-kasus wanprestasi debitur. Saran dari penelitian ini adalah kekuatan eksekutorial fidusia harus tetap dipertahankan, dengan memiliki kekuatan eksekutorial yang masih berlaku, perusahaan pembiayaan dapat lebih mudah melakukan reposisi aset yang dijaminkan dalam situasi di mana nasabah tidak memenuhi kewajibannya. Hal ini memungkinkan perusahaan pembiayaan untuk mengambil langkah-langkah penyelesaian yang lebih cepat dan efisien, tanpa harus melibatkan proses hukum yang panjang dan mahal. Penting bagi perusahaan pembiayaan untuk tetap mematuhi ketentuan hukum dan melaksanakan proses reposisi dengan itikad baik.

---

Constitutional Court Decision 18/PUU-XVII/2019 renders fiduciary certificates no longer having enforceable power and weakens fiduciary certificates. This is inconsistent with Article 119 of the Republic of Indonesia Law Number 4 of 2023 concerning the Development and Strengthening of the Financial Sector, which states that fiduciary guarantees received by Financing Service Providers as guarantees for meeting consumer obligations, as referred to in the law on fiduciary guarantees, have enforceable power. Constitutional Court Decision 18/PUU-XVII/2019 also provides an opportunity for debtors to defend themselves and delay the execution of fiduciary certificates. The enforceable power of fiduciary certificates through the judicial process can also create legal uncertainty. The research method used is normative juridical with descriptive analytical research specifications. From the results of this research, it is concluded that the application of the Principle of Benefits in Constitutional Court Decision 18/PUU/XVII/2019 provides stronger protection for debtors, thus posing challenges and consequences for financing companies. They must adjust their strategies and business processes to the new requirements set by Constitutional Court Decision 18/PUU-XVII/2019, which may affect their efficiency and ability to handle debtor default cases. The suggestion from this research is that the enforceable power of fiduciary should be maintained, with its enforceable power still applicable. Financing companies can better reflect the guaranteed asset in situations where customers fail to fulfill their obligations. This allows financing companies to take faster and more efficient resolution steps without involving lengthy and costly legal proceedings. It is important for financing companies to maintain legal certainty and implement restructuring processes with good faith."