Kekuatan Eksekutorial Akta Jaminan Fidusia terhadap Objek yang Dikuasai Negara Executorial Force of Fiduciary Guarantee Deeds over Objects Controlled by the State
Article Sidebar
Page Numbers:
2805-1817
Digital Object Identifier:
10.58578/ahkam.v5i3.10762
Viewed: 0 times
Downloaded: 0 times
LYAS Publisher cordially invites qualified professionals to serve as Editors or Reviewers. Your expertise will make an important contribution to maintaining and strengthening the academic quality of our publications. Interested applicants are kindly requested to complete the application form at the following link: Editors & Reviewers
Please feel free to contact us if you need any further information about the submission process or if you have any additional questions.
Authors:
Juan Satria Mahendra1*, Noor Hafidah2 
Copyright :
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication.
Main Article Content
Abstract
Although fiduciary security has been extensively regulated in Law Number 42 of 1999, studies that specifically discuss the executorial force of fiduciary deeds when the collateral object is controlled by the state remain limited. This study aims to analyze whether state confiscation eliminates creditors’ proprietary rights over fiduciary collateral objects and to formulate the legal construction of the position of fiduciary creditors regarding collateral objects confiscated by the state. This study used a normative legal method with a theoretical research type, through a statutory approach and a prescriptive conceptual approach. Legal materials were collected through library research and analyzed qualitatively using systematic interpretation and deductive reasoning. The results show that state confiscation does not automatically eliminate creditors’ proprietary rights because fiduciary security has the characteristic of droit de suite as affirmed in Article 20 of Law Number 42 of 1999 and grants creditors a preferential position based on Article 27 paragraph (1) of the same law. However, the absence of explicit regulation regarding the position of fiduciary creditors when collateral objects are confiscated by the state creates legal uncertainty and a conflict of norms between civil law and criminal law. The conclusion of this study emphasizes the importance of synchronizing fiduciary security law and criminal confiscation procedures so that the rights of bona fide third parties remain protected. The implications of this study provide theoretical contributions to the development of security law literature and practical implications for policymakers in formulating clear creditor protection mechanisms when fiduciary collateral objects are subject to state confiscation.
Downloads
Article Details
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
References
Aditya, R. H. K., & Yunanto, Y. (2025). Eksekutorial Jaminan Fidusia Terhadap Debitur yang Cidera Janji (Wanprestasi) Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019. Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.56370/jhlg.v6i4.891
Ajwah, Usman, R., & Qamariyanti, Y. (2023). Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Kreditur Sebagai Pemegang Jaminan Fidusia Benda Persediaan. Notary Law Journal, 2(1), 82–94. https://doi.org/10.32801/nolaj.v2i1.40
Astuty, A., & Tohari, M. (2025). Analisis Sosiologi Hukum Terhadap Peran Hukum dalam Perubahan Sosial. Journal of Innovation Research and Knowledge, 4(9), 6301–6314. https://doi.org/10.53625/jirk.v4i9.9651
Badawi, A., & Yuwono, N. K. N. (2024). The executorial nature of fiduciary guarantee certificates as equivalent to final and binding court decisions. Rechtenstudent, 5(3), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.35719/rch.v5i3.365
Firmanto, F., & Sutrisno, H. (2026). Legal certainty of land registration as a form of protection of citizens’ constitutional rights. Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum, 5(1), 50–63. https://doi.org/10.55583/jkih.v5i1.1661
Fitriyanti, L. D., & Suwandono, A. (2025). Perampasan Aset Sebagai Sanksi Tambahan: Analisis Pengembalian Kerugian Negara dalam Penanganan Tindak Pidana Korupsi di Indonesia. JAKSA: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum dan Politik, 3(3), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.51903/n9vpm692
Gozali, D. S., & Hafidah, N. (2020). Dasar-dasar Hukum Kebendaan. UII Press.
Halik, A., & Gozali, D. S. (2025). Perlindungan Hukum Pemenang Lelang Eksekusi Barang Rampasan Negara yang Berstatus Objek Jaminan Fidusia. Jurnal Riset Rumpun Ilmu Bahasa, 4(2), 657–670. https://doi.org/10.55606/jurribah.v4i2.6282
Harefa, B., & Supardi. (2025). Perampasan Aset Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang: Perlindungan Pihak Ketiga Beritikad Baik dalam Perspektif Hukum Indonesia. Risalah Hukum, 21(2), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.30872/risalah.v21.i2.2008
Hidayat, M. F. (2024). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Pemegang Jaminan Fidusia atas Dirampasnya Objek Jaminan yang Digunakan Sebagai Alat Kejahatan. Journal of Law and Islamic Law, 2(2), 179–194.
Imelda, R., Yetti, Y., & Dewi, S. (2024). Pengembalian Barang Bukti Pasca Putusan Berkekuatan Hukum di Rupbasan Rengat. Collegium Studiosum Journal, 7(2), 600–619. https://doi.org/10.56301/csj.v7i2.1446
Kristiawanto, H. (2024). Pengantar Mudah Memahami Metode Penelitian Hukum. Nas Media Pustaka.
Kurniawan, I. D., & Ezzerouali, S. (2024). Revisiting the principle of legal certainty: A contemporary analysis through the lens of legal positivism. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17385496
Marzuki, P. M. (2017). Penelitian Hukum (Edisi revisi). Prenada Media.
Rahim, A., Aulia, S., Arifin, M., Riyadi, S., & Kepastian Hukum, A. (2023). Relevansi Asas Kepastian Hukum dalam Sistem Penyelenggaraan Administrasi Negara Indonesia. JIIP: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Pendidikan, 6(8), 5806–5811. https://doi.org/10.54371/jiip.v6i8.2575
Simbolon, F. A., Kamello, T., Sidabariba, B., & Andriati, S. L. (2025). Hak Preferen Kreditor Melaksanakan Lelang Eksekusi Jaminan Fidusia. Gorontalo Law Review, 8(1), 72–88. https://doi.org/10.32662/golrev.v8i1.3849
Stefany, S. (2023). Kepastian Hukum Prinsip “Droit de Suite” Terhadap Objek Jaminan Fidusia yang Dirampas untuk Negara = Legal Certainty of “Droit de Suite” Principles Against the Fiduciary Assurance Objects Deprived for the State.
Subagiyo, D. T. (2018). Hukum Jaminan dalam Perspektif Undang-Undang Jaminan Fidusia: Suatu Pengantar. UWKS Press. https://uwks.ac.id
Supianto, Rumawi, & Budiman, N. T. (2024). Kelahiran Hak Kebendaan pada Jaminan Fidusia. Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana. https://digilib.uinkhas.ac.id/36952/1/99768
Suwarno, E., Suriaatmadja, T. T., & Kurrohman, T. (2026). Legal protection against the transfer of fiducia rights in the takeover of creditors. Sinergi International Journal of Law, 4(1), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.61194/law.v4i1.811
Tambunan, M. B. (2025). Status Hukum Objek Jaminan Fidusia yang Ditetapkan Sebagai Barang Rampasan Negara yang Telah Dilelang. http://repository.upnvj.ac.id
Usman, R. (2011). Hukum Kebendaan. Sinar Grafika.
Wahyu, A. A., Fuad, F., & Machmud, A. (2024). Aspek Kepastian Hukum dalam Perjanjian Jaminan Fidusia. Binamulia Hukum, 13(2), 429–445. https://doi.org/10.37893/jbh.v13i2.935
Zulfikar, R. (2022). Perlindungan Hukum Pemegang Jaminan Fidusia atas Dirampasnya Objek Jaminan dalam Perkara Korupsi. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, 29(1), 47–67. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol29.iss1.art3