Legal Implications of Bankruptcy on Bank-related Problems and Customer's Legal Protection
Abstract
The background of this legal research is that the Bank is an intermediary institution as well as a profit-oriented institution. Intermediation means that banks are pillars of the national economy. This puts the Bank regulated by regulations and supervised by special authorities. Banks are business entities that have special characteristics so revocation of business licenses, dissolution of legal entities, and liquidation of banks cannot be equated with generally accepted procedures. The legal issues in the research are: Can a troubled bank be bankrupt and how is the legal protection for depositors according to the Law on Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations? This research is juridical normative by using a statutory approach, namely: the Banking Law and Bankruptcy Law, and a conceptual approach. The legal materials that have been obtained are analyzed by content analysis. Based on the results of the discussion, it is shown that: first, according to the provisions of the Banking Law, Bank Indonesia is given the authority to revoke the business licenses of troubled banks. Likewise, the Bankruptcy Law gives authority to Bank Indonesia to file for bankruptcy against troubled banks. So far, Bank Indonesia in dealing with troubled banks after rescue efforts failed to use the liquidation process and has never used bankruptcy efforts. And protection for Depositors has been provided by the liquidation mechanism and banking regulations are lex specialist to Law no. 37/2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations is a lex generalist. In addition, it is impossible for Bank Indonesia to choose a bankruptcy law channel to damage the national economic system just to serve the interests of creditors themselves. Even so, banking regulations and their regulatory agencies have provided legal protection for depositors and if they feel they have been harmed, they can sue the Commercial Court.
Keywords: implications, bank bankruptcy, legal protection, bank customers
References
[1] Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 10 of 1998 concerning Banking, which was ratified on November 10 of 1998.
[2] Ibrahim J. Pengimpasan Pinjaman (Kompensasi) dan Asas Kebebasan Berkontrak dalam Perjanjian Kredit Bank. Bandung: Utomo; 2003.
[3] Sutedi A. Hukum Perbankan: Suatu Tinjauan Tentang Pencucian Uang, Merger, Likuidasi, dan Kepailitan. Jakarta: Sinar Graphic; 2015.
[4] Law Number 7 of 2009 concerning Stipulation of Government Regulations in Lieu of Law Number 3 of 2008 concerning Amendments to Law Number 24 of 2004 concerning Deposit Insurance Corporations to become Laws.
[5] Simbolon A. “Tata Cara Pengajuan Permohonan Pailit ke Pengadilan Niaga,” Huk. Bisnis. 2014;33(2).
[6] Santi M. “Bank Konvensional Vs Bank Syariah.” EKSYAR J. Ekon. Syari’ah Bisnis Islam. 2015; 2(1) 222–243. [Online]. Available: https://ejournal.staimtulungagung. ac.id/index.php/eksyar/article/view/77
[7] Hartini R. Hukum Kepailitan. 5th ed. Malang: UMM Press; 2020.
[8] Djumhana M. Hukum Perbankan di Indonesia. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti; 2003.
[9] Ivida DA. Hukum Kepailitan, Prinsip-prinsip Kepastian Hukum Penetapan Hakim Pengawas Terhadap DPT-PKPU pada Pencocokan Piutang oleh Kurator dalam Kepailitan. Yogyakarta: Laksbang Pustaka; 2021.
[10] Hariningsih S. Perbandingan Pengaturan Masalah Kepailitan PERPU 1/1998 jo. UU No. 4/1998 dengan RUU tentang Kepailitan. Volume 17. Huk. Bisnis; 2002.
[11] Simanjuntak R. “Draft Perubahan UU Kepailitan Dalam Perspektif Pengacara dan Komentar Perubahan UU Kepailitan.” Huk. Bisnis. 2017;7(3).
[12] Law Number 21 of 2011 concerning the Financial Services Authority.
[13] Lotulung PE. Hukum Kepailitan dan Implikasinya Bagi Dunia Usaha. Volume 12. J. Huk. Bisnis; 2001.
[14] “Decision of the Jakarta Commercial Court Number: 21/Pailit/2001/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst.”
[15] Irianto C. “PENERAPAN ASAS KELANGSUNGAN USAHA DALAM PENYELESAIAN PERKARA KEPAILITAN DAN PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAAN UTANG (PKPU),” J. Huk. dan Peradil., vol. 4, no. 3, p. 399, Nov. 2015, https://doi.org/10.25216/jhp.4.3.2015.399-418..
[16] Prihatmaka HW, Sunarmi S, Hendra R. INSOLVENSI DALAM HUKUM KEPAILITAN DI INDONESIA (Studi Putusan No.48/Pailit/2012/Pn.Niaga.Jkt.Pst Antara PT. Telekomunikasi Selular Vs PT. Primajaya Informatika). FIAT JUSTISIAJurnal Ilmu Huk. 2015 Aug;8(2): https://doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v8no2.295.
[17] Nugroho SA. Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Kencana; 2018.
[18] Sunarmi, Prinsip Keseimbangan dalam Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia “A Critical Review on Bankruptcy Law: Towards The Bankruptcy Laws That Protect Creditor and Debitor Interest, 2nd ed. Jakarta: PT. Softmedia, 2010.
[19] Onakoyam BA, Olotu AE. Bankruptcy and Insolvency: An Exploration of Relevant Theories. Econ. Financ. 2017;7(3).
[20] Sunardi N, Oktaviani L. “Analisis CAMEL Dalam Menilai Tingkat Kesehatan Bank (Studi Kasus Pada Subsektor Perbankan Yang Terdaftar di BEI Periode 2011- 2015),” J. Ilm. Ilmu Manaj., pp. 44-58 ISSN: 2356-2005, 2015, [Online]. Available: http://eprints.undip.ac.id/16854/
[21] Hermansyah, Hukum Perbankan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Kencana; 2011.
[22] Salim R. PERLINDUNGAN KONSUMEN DALAM KEPAILITAN. J. Huk. 2020 Jun;36(1):25.