Nunuk Wahyuningrum, Soegianto Soegianto, Muhammad Junaidi, Miftah Arifin

Dampak Hukum Sertifikat Bukan Atas Nama Debitur Yang Dibuat Sebagai Jaminan Kredit Di Bank

Introduction

Dampak hukum sertifikat bukan atas nama debitur yang dibuat sebagai jaminan kredit di bank. Analisis dampak hukum sertifikat pihak ketiga sebagai jaminan kredit bank saat debitur wanprestasi. Ungkap kurangnya perlindungan hukum dan urgensi kepastian bagi pemilik jaminan.

Abstract

This research aims to analyze the legal impact of certificates not in the name of the debtor which are made as credit collateral at the Bank and to analyze efforts to resolve loans of debtors who are in default while certificates not in the name of the debtor are made as credit collateral. The urgency of this research is so that the public gets legal certainty regarding certificates not in the debtor's name which are used as collateral for credit at the bank and debtors experience default so that the public is more careful in lending their certificates to other people to be used as collateral at the bank. This type of research is known as normative jurisprudence. The results of the research show that involving third parties in the process of debt contracts against credit is not prohibited. However, the regulation does not explicitly regulate the rights and obligations of third parties, so it cannot provide explicit legal protection to the third party as the guarantor in cases where he feels injured either by the debtor or the creditor of the credit. Consequently, the legal impact arising from the availability of collateral certificates of debt borrowers. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis dampak hukum sertifikat bukan atas nama debitur yang dibuat sebagai jaminan kredit di Bank dan untuk menganalisa upaya penyelesaian pinjaman debitur yang mengalami wanprestasi sedang sertifikat bukan atas nama debitur yang dibuat sebagai jaminan kredit. Urgensi penelitian ini adalah agar masyarakat mendapatkan kepastian hukum tentang sertifikat bukan atas nama debitur yang dijadikan jaminan kredit di bank dan debitur mengalami wanprestasi agar masyarakat lebih berhati-hati dalam meminjamkan sertifikatnya kepada orang lain untuk dijadikan jaminan di bank. Jenis penelitian ini dikenal sebagai yuridis normatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa melibatkan pihak ketiga dalam proses perjanjian utang piutang terhadap kredit tidak dilarang. Namun, peraturan tersebut tidak secara eksplisit mengatur hak dan kewajiban pihak ketiga, sehingga tidak dapat memberikan perlindungan hukum yang jelas bagi pihak ketiga sebagai pemilik jaminan dalam kasus di mana ia merasa dirugikan baik terhadap debitur maupun kreditur kredit tersebut. Akibatnya, dampak hukum yang timbul dari adanya jaminan sertifikat hutang piutang

Review

This paper addresses a highly pertinent issue in banking law, examining the "Legal Impact of Certificates Not in the Name of the Debtor Used as Credit Collateral in Banks." The research clearly outlines its dual objectives: to analyze the legal implications of such third-party collateral and to investigate resolution strategies for defaulted loans where this type of security is involved. Utilizing a normative jurisprudence methodology, the study positions itself as critical for providing legal certainty to the public and emphasizing the inherent risks for individuals who lend their certificates as collateral. The identified urgency underscores the practical relevance of this research for both financial institutions and the general public, highlighting a common yet legally complex scenario. The core findings of the research illuminate a significant regulatory gap. It confirms that the involvement of third parties in debt contracts for credit purposes is not prohibited by existing law. However, the crucial revelation is the absence of explicit regulations governing the rights and obligations of these third parties. This regulatory void, as the paper demonstrates, directly translates into a lack of explicit legal protection for the third-party guarantor. Consequently, if such a guarantor feels aggrieved by either the debtor or the creditor, they find themselves in a legally vulnerable position, unable to rely on clear statutory provisions for redress. This constitutes the primary "legal impact" identified by the study. Overall, this research makes a valuable contribution by pinpointing a critical area of legal ambiguity within banking practices. Its strength lies in clearly articulating the problem of absent explicit legal protection for third-party guarantors, a finding with significant implications for risk management in banks and informed decision-making by the public. While the abstract effectively establishes the problem and the lack of explicit protection, a deeper exploration of the *specific manifestations* of these legal impacts in practice or through case studies, along with detailed "efforts to resolve loans" for defaulted debtors under such circumstances, would further enrich the analysis. Nevertheless, the study successfully highlights an urgent need for regulatory clarity to ensure fairness and legal certainty for all parties involved in third-party collateral arrangements.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.