Section Articles

The Urgency of Applying Article 39 paragraph (2) UUJN Against Prevention of Indications of Criminal Acts in Notary Deeds

https://doi.org/10.32505/jurisprudensi.v15i1.5635
Urip Prayitno
uriptobat@gmail.com (Primary Contact)
Universitas Narotama Surabaya, Indonesia
Moh. Saleh
Universitas Dokuz Eylül, Izmir, Turkiye

Article Sidebar

Submitted
Jan 25, 2023
Accepted
Feb 10, 2023
Published
Feb 11, 2023
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 271 Download : 228

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Notaries are authorized to make authentic deeds (Article 15 paragraph (1) of Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning the Position of Notary). A notary has the potential to be entangled in criminal law, if it is proven that intentionally or unintentionally the Notary together with the parties / interceptors to make a deed with the intention and purpose of benefiting one party and harming the other party. This study aims to examine the urgency of applying Article 39 paragraph (2) of the UUJN to the prevention of indications of criminal acts in notarial deeds. The research method used is the normative juridical method, which is carried out by analytical descriptive analysis. The results of the study concluded that notaries cannot be held liable when the element of fraud and mistakes is committed by the confronters, because the Notary only records what is submitted by the parties to be poured into the deed (partij deed). False statements submitted by the parties are the responsibility of the parties. With regard to the actions of notaries who commit criminal acts of forgery of deeds or criminal acts of false information committed by the parties, UUJN does not specifically regulate related to criminal provisions because it is based on the principle of legality which is the principles in the Criminal Code.

Keywords

Urgency Article 39 paragraf (2) UUJN Crime Notary Deed

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the Jurisprudensi: Jurnal Ilmu Syariah, Perundang-undangan dan Ekonomi Islam right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the Jurisprudensi: Jurnal Ilmu Syariah, Perundang-undangan dan Ekonomi Islam 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.
  3. 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).
How to Cite
Prayitno, U., & Saleh, M. (2023). The Urgency of Applying Article 39 paragraph (2) UUJN Against Prevention of Indications of Criminal Acts in Notary Deeds. Jurisprudensi: Jurnal Ilmu Syariah, Perundang-Undangan Dan Ekonomi Islam, 15(1), 58-70. https://doi.org/10.32505/jurisprudensi.v15i1.5635

References

  1. Abi Jam’an Kurnia. (2019). Jerat Hukum Bagi Notaris yang Memalsukan Akta Autentik. hukumonline.com. https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/jerat-hukum-bagi-notaris-yang-memalsukan-akta-autentik-lt5c5a568ab332f
  2. Bayu Rushadian Hutama. (2012). Ketidak Cermatan Notaris Dalam Menjalankan Jabatan Notaris. Universitas Indonesia.
  3. Dea Derika. (2020). Fungsi Notaris Dalam Pemeriksaan Identitas Penghadap Terhadap Autentisitas Akta Dihubungkan Dengan Asas Kehati-hatian. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum: Syiar Hukum, 18(2), 174.
  4. Enggarwati, I. D. (2015). Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Dan Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Notaris Yang Diperiksa Oleh Penyidik Dalam Tindak Pidana Keterangan Palsu Pada Akta Otentik. Jurnal Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum Universitas Brawijaya, 11–12.
  5. Fikri Ariesta Rahman. (2018). Penerapan Prinsip Kehati-hatian Notaris Dalam Mengenal Para Penghadap. Lex Renaissance, 3(2), 431.
  6. Freddy Haris & Leny Helena. (2017). Notaris Indonesia. Lintas Cetak Publishing.
  7. Fuad Brylian Yanri. (2019). Pertanggungjawaban Notaris Terhadap Akta Autentik Yang Berindikasi Tindak Pidana. Hukum dan Keadilan, 6(2), 71.
  8. Ida Bagus Paramaningrat Manuaba. (2017). Prinsip Kehati-hatian Notaris dalam Membuat Akta Autentitk. Universitas Udayana.
  9. Irma Devita Purnamasari. (2015). Akta Notaris Sebagai Akta Otentik. hukumonline.com. https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/akta-notaris-sebagai-akta-otentik-lt550c0a7450a04
  10. Komar Andasasmita. (1981). Notaris I. Sumur Bandung.
  11. Lili Rasjidi & Liza Sonia Rasjidi. (2012). Dasar-Dasar Filsafat dan Teori Hukum. Citra Aditya Bakti.
  12. Lina Jamilah. (2012). Asas Kebebasan Berkontrak Dalam Perjanjian Standar Baku. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum: Syiar Hukum, XIII(1), 229.
  13. M. Yahya Harahap. (2000). Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP (Penyidikan dan Penuntutan) (Edisi Kedu). Sinar Grafika.
  14. M. Yahya Harahap. (2008). Hukum Acara Perdata tentang Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan, Pembuktian dan Putusan Pengadilan. Sinar Grafika.
  15. M. Yahya Harahap. (2015). Hukum Acara Perdata: Tentang Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan, Pembuktian, dan Putusan Pengadilan (Cetakan Ke). Sinar Grafika.
  16. Missariyani. (2016). Akta Notaris Sebagai Alat Bukti Dalam Penyelesaian Perkara Perdata. Legal Opinion, 4(4), 8.
  17. Moeljatno. (1993). Asas-Asas Hukum Pidana. Rineka Cipta.
  18. Sjaifurrahman. (2011). Aspek Pertanggungjawaban Notaris dalam Pembuatan Akta. Mandar Maju.