Improving The Object Of Fiduciary Guarantee According To Law Number 42 Of 1999 On Fiduciary Guarantee

Ahmad Yani Kosali

doi:10.46650/jsds.2.1.901.30-39

Ahmad Yani Kosali College of Administration Science of Satya Negara Palembang, Indonesia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46650/jsds.2.1.901.30-39

Keywords: binding, object guarantee, fiduciary

Abstract

Fiduciary is the transfer of ownership rights of an object based on trust, where ownership right of the object is transferred remains under the control of the owner of the object. The subject of the research was how to bind the object of fiduciary guarantee according to Law Number 42 of 1999 on fiduciary? What are the consequences if the binding of fiduciary guarantee object is unfulfilled? This research was normative legal research which means that the objects are secondary data on library. The type of the research was descriptive. It can be concluded that the binding of fiduciary guarantee object according to Law Number 42 of 1999 on fiduciary guarantee is certificate of fiduciary guarantee as an evidence which is an authentic deed. It can be seen from the characteristics of certificate fiduciary guarantee, issued by an authorized official or public official who has authority for issuing certificate fiduciary guarantee in Fiduciary Registration Office under the supervision of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights. The consequences (the binding of fiduciary guarantee object is unfulfilled) are the default causes several legal consequences for debtors and creditors, especially for creditors who must loss. While for debtors, the legal consequence is the existence of a new status for which the debtor must responsible of. Fiduciary guarantee, mostly in form of movable objects, allows for a transfer of fiduciary guarantee; one example of the reason for the transfer is the debtor wants to transfer his credit to another creditor to seek for lower interest. Then, if a debtor has paid off the debt, it can cause the fiduciary guarantee to be canceled.

References

Chainur, A. (2011). Hukum Pidana Perbankan. First Press. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Djumhana, M. (2000). Hukum Perbankan di Indonesia. Bandung: PT. Citra Aditya.

Gatot, S. (2008). Tindak Pidana Korupsi di Bidang Perkreditan. Bandung: Alumni.

Hartono, H. (2004). Pokok-pokok Hukum Perikatan dan Hukum Jaminan. Yogyakarta : Liberty.

Hasibuan, M. S. P. (2008). Dasar-dasar Perbankan. Jakarta : PT. Bumi Aksara.

Hermansyah. (2003). Hukum Perbankan Indonesia. Jakarta : PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.

Emirson, J. (1998). Hukum Perbankan Indonesia. Palembang : Kelompok Study Hukum dan Bisnis FH. Unsri.

Kasmir. (2002). Dasar-Dasar Perbankan. Jakarta : PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.

Marhainis. A. H. (2001). Hukum Perbankan di Indonesia. Jakarta : Pradnya.

Mariam. D. B. (2001). Kompilasi Hukum Perikatan. Bandung : Citra Aditya Bakti.

Oey, H. T. (2000). Fiducia Sebagai Jaminan Unsur-Unsur Perikatan. Jakarta : Ghalia Indonesia.

Rachmadi, U. (2009). Hukum Perbankan. Jakarta : Raja Grafindo Persada.

Salim, H. S. (2004). Perkembangan Hukum Jaminan di Indonesia. Jakarta : Raja Grafindo Persada.

Satrio, J. (2002). Hukum Jaminan Hak Jaminan Kebendaan Fidusia. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Sembiring, S. (2004). Hukum Perbankan. Bandung : CV. Mandar Maju.

Simorangkir, P. (2002). Dasar-dasar dan Mekanisme Perbankan. Jakarta : Yagrat.

Thomas, S. (2006). Kelembagaan Perbankan. Jakarta : Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata. Terjemahan R. Subekti dan R. . Tjitrosudibia. 2004. Jakarta : Pradnya Paramita.

Undang-Undang No. 10 Tahun 1998 tentang Perubahan Undang-Undang No. 7 tahun 1992 tentang Perbankan.

Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Fidusia.