The Application of Affidavits in Bankruptcy Proceedings: A Comparative Study of Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v10i28.20134Keywords:
affidavits, bankruptcy, distinction, systemsAbstract
In bankruptcy cases, affidavits are commonly used as written evidence that is both effective and efficient for simple evidentiary procedures before the court. In countries adhering to the civil law system, such as Indonesia, affidavits are implicitly regulated under Article 1866 of the Civil Code (KUH Perdata) and Article 164 of the HIR/Article 284 of the RBg, classified as written evidence in the form of documents. On the contrary, in countries with common law systems, such as Malaysia and Singapore, the application of affidavits as evidence in bankruptcy cases differs significantly. This study aims to examine the application of affidavits in bankruptcy cases across several countries, including Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. It employs normative legal research methods by analyzing legal documents within the context of bankruptcy law. The study utilizes statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, relying on secondary data collected through library research encompassing primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The findings of this study indicate that in Indonesia, affidavits cannot be classified as authentic deeds and do not possess the characteristics of conclusive evidence, thus they cannot be equated with witness testimonies. However, affidavits can be used as ordinary written evidence to support other evidence, assisting judges in efficiently resolving bankruptcy cases within a limited examination period. In contrast, in Malaysia and Singapore, affidavits in bankruptcy cases are generally used as authentic deeds, sworn before a commissioner for oaths or notary public, and are required to be submitted as evidence by both creditors and debtors in court proceedings. Thus, the distinction between common law and civil law systems in the application of affidavits is clearly lied at their level as a tool of evidence in bankruptcy proceedings.
References
[1] Achmad F, Daulay PN, Nurwidiatmo N. Pelaksanaan Eksekusi Hak Tanggungan YangDilakukan Kreditur Separatis Dalam Keadaan Insolvensi. Jurnal Nuansa Kenotariatan. 2017; 3 (1): 43–54.
[2] Ambarita M. Kekuatan pembuktian pemeriksaan setempat (Gerechtelijke plaatsopneming) dalam pemeriksaan sengketa perdata. Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia. 2021; 18 (3): 385–93.
[3] Apriantoro MS, Sekartaji SI, Suryaningsih A. Penyelesaian Sengketa Kepailitan Ekonomi Syariah Perspektif Ibnu Rusyd Al-Qurthubi Dalam Bidayatul Mujtahid Wa Nihayatul Muqtashid. Jurnal Ilmiah Ekonomi Islam. 2021; 7 (3): 1400–8.
[4] Barus Z. Analisis filosofis tentang peta konseptual penelitian hukum normatif dan penelitian hukum sosiologis. Jurnal Dinamika Hukum. 2013; 13(2): 307–18.
[5] Priscilla C, Chintya K. Kajian Yuridis Pengadilan Niaga Sebagai Lembaga Penyelesaian Perkara Kepailitan. Lex Privatum. 2020; VIII (1): 5–12.
[6] Darusman Y. Kajian Yuridis Dualisme Kewarganegaraan Dalam Undang- Undang Nomor: 12 Tahun 2006 Tentang Kewarganegaraan (Studi Pada Kasus Gloria Natapraja Hamel). Jurnal Ilmiah Galuh Justisi. 2017; 5 (1): 53–80.
[7] Hartono DT. Perlindungan Hukum Kreditor Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Kepailitan. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Legal Opinion. 2016; 1 (4): 1–9.
[8] Kandou, R. M. F., Mamesah, E. L., & Sepang, R. Pelaksanaan Pemeriksaan Setempat Sebagai Bahan Pertimbangan Hakim Dalam Memutus Perkara Perdata. Lex Administratum, 2023; 11(5).
[9] Kenting YA, Parulian HD. Kedudukan Kreditor Separatis Terhadap Rencana PerdamaianDalam Proses Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum: ALETHEA. 2022; 5 (2): 91–110.
[10] Khairunnissa S. Pengaturan Kepailitan Lintas Batas Negara dalam Perbandingan Hukum Perdata Internasional Antara Indonesia dan Malaysia. Recht Studiosum Law Review. 2024; 3 (1): 105–11.
[11] Larose A. “Analisis Yuridis Komparasi Penyelesaian Kepailitan Transnasional di Singapura dan Malaysia dengan Penyelesaian di Indonesia”. Law. Development & Justice Review. 2023; 6 (3): 276–91.
[12] Lengkong, L. Y. Keterangan Ahli Sebagai Alat Bukti dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Perdata. to-ra, 2020; 6 (3), 319-329.
[13] Leonardus RF, Alexander YP, Wijayanta T. Practice of Applying Affidavits in Bankruptcy Law and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations. Unnes LawJournal. 2023; 9 (2): 467–88.
[14] Leonardus RF, Wijayanta T. “Affidavit dalam Kepailitan dan PKPU”, accessed on 11 Aaugust 2024 at 11.00 WITA. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/affidavit-dalamkepailitan- dan-pkpu-lt658563c098892/,
[15] Lerinsa F. Potensi Kebangkrutan Suatu Perusahaan Akibat Mismanajemen. Jurnal Simki Economic. 2021; 4 (1): 66–73.
[16] Mulyana, Asep Dwi, and Fajaruddin. Penilaian Alat Bukti Affidavit Dalam Sistem Hukum Acara Perdata Di Indonesia (Studi Putusan No. 247/Pdt.G/2019/PN Mdn). Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Hukum. 2020; 1 (2): 1–14.
[17] Nurkumalawati I. Study of Implementation of The Minister of Law and Human Rules Regarding Registration and Giving Immigration Facilities for Double Citizens. Jurnal Ilmiah Kajian Keimigrasian. 2018; 1 (1): 122–36.
[18] Ramadhan C. Konvergensi Civil Law dan Common Law di Indonesia dalam Penemuan dan Pembentukan Hukum. Mimbar Hukum. 2018; 30 (2): 213–29.
[19] Sari, Endah Puspita, dkk. “Kekuatan Pembuktian Affidavit sebagai Alat Bukti Surat”, Brawijaya Law Student Journal. 2015; 01-22.
[20] Sari, I. P., & Zahidi, M. S. Pengaturan Hukum bagi Orang Asing yang Tinggal di Indonesia. Jurist-Diction, 2023; 6(3).
[21] Sidharta I. Pembuktian Sederhana Dalam Putusan Pailit (Studi Kasus Perkara Nomor 515 K/PDT.SUS/2016). Jurnal Legal Reasoning. 2018; 1 (1): 36–47.
[22] Simanjuntak E. Peran yurisprudensi dalam sistem hukum di Indonesia. Jurnal Konstitusi. 2019; 16 (1): 83–104.
[23] Sugema I. Krisis Keuangan Global 2008-2009 Dan Implikasinya Pada Perekonomian Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmu Pertanian Indonesia. 2014; 17 (3): 145–52.
[24] Sunge M. Beban Pembuktian Dalam Perkara Perdata. Jurnal Inovasi, 9(02). Susanto, A. M.,Malonda, E., Rosadi, I., & Rizki, M. (2019). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi, 2012;
[25] Bank atas Upaya PKPU (Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang) dari Pihak Ke-3 (Tiga). Justitia Jurnal Hukum, 3 (1).
[26] Utami PD. Implikasi Yuridis Perkawinan Campuran Terhadap Pewarisan Tanah Bagi Anak. Kertha Wicaksana. 2021; 15 (1): 80–9.
[27] Wijayanta T. Kajian Tentang Pengaturan Syarat Kepailitan Menurut Undang-Undang omor 37 Tahun 2004. Mimbar Hukum. 2014; 26 (1): 1–13.
[28] Wijayanta, T., & Adistia, S. T. Development of The Heritage Center as Bankruptcy Curator. Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum, 2019; 11 (1), 1-18.
[29] Wijayanta T, Adistia ST, Leonardus RF, Hermawan BE. Should Indonesia Learn from Malaysia and Singapore’s Cross-Border Insolvency Asset Settlements. Yustisia. 2024; 13 (1): 27–37.
[30] Leonardus RF, Wijayanta T. “Affidavit in Bankruptcy and PKPU”, accessed on August 11, 2024 at 11.00 WITA. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/affidavitdalam- kebankilitan-dan-pkpu-lt658563c098892/
[31] Lerinsa F. Potential Bankruptcy A Company Consequence Mismanagement. Simki Economic Journal. 2021; 4 (1): 66–73.
[32] Mulyana, Asep Dwi, and Fajaruddin. Assessment of Affidavit Evidence in the Civil Procedure Law System in Indonesia (Study of Decision No. 247/Pdt.G/2019/PN Mdn). Scientific Journal of Law Students. 2020; 1 (2): 1–14.
[33] Nurkumalawati I. Study of Implementation of The Ministry of Law and Human Rules Regarding Registration and Providing Immigration Facilities for Double Citizens. Scientific Journal of Immigration Studies. 2018; 1 (1): 122–36.
[34] Ramadhan C. Convergence of Civil Law and Common Law in Indonesia in the Discovery and Formation of Law. Mimbar Hukum. 2018; 30 (2): 213–29.
[35] Sari, Endah Puspita, et al. “The Evidentiary Power of Affidavit as Documentary Evidence”, Brawijaya Law Student Journal. 2015; 01-22.
[36] Sari, IP, & Zahidi, MS Legal Regulations for Foreigners Living in Indonesia. Jurist- Diction, 2023; 6 (3).
[37] Sidharta I. Simple Proof in Bankruptcy Decisions (Case Study of Case Number 515 K/PDT.SUS/2016). Journal of Legal Reasoning. 2018; 1 (1): 36–47.
[38] Simanjuntak E. The role of jurisprudence in the legal system in Indonesia. Constitutional Journal. 2019; 16 (1): 83–104.
[39] Sugema I. The Global Financial Crisis of 2008-2009 and Its Implications on the Indonesian Economy. Indones J Agric Sci. 2014; 17 (3): 145–52.
[40] Sunge, M. (2012). Burden of Proof in Civil Cases. Innovation Journal, 9(02). Susanto, AM, Malonda, E., Rosadi, I., & Rizki, M. Legal Protection for. 2019;
[41] Bank on PKPU (Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations) Efforts from Third (3rd) Parties. Justitia Jurnal Hukum, 2012; 3(1).
[42] Utami PD. Legal Implications of Mixed Marriages on Land Inheritance for Children. Kertha Wicaksana. 2021; 15 (1): 80–9.
[43] Wijayanta T. “Study on the Regulation of Bankruptcy Requirements According to Law Number 37 of 2004”. Legal Forum. 26 (1). 2014; 1-13.
[44] Wijayanta, T., & Adistia, ST Development of The Heritage Center as Bankruptcy Curator. Journal of Legal Reform, 2017; 11 (1), 1-18.
[45] Wijayanta T, Adistia ST, Leonardus RF, Hermawan BE. Should Indonesia Learn from Malaysia and Singapore’s Cross-Border Insolvency Asset Settlements. Yustisia. 2024; 13 (1): 27–37.
[46] Wijayanta T. A.H, Muhammad Bagus. Cross- rder Insolvency, Kerja Sama Lintas Batas Antar lembaga Peradilan: Perbandingan Indonesia, Malaysia dan Korea Selatan. D.I Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press; 2021.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Rado Fridsel Leonardus, Ricky Shandy, Sheva Trisanda Adistia, Winanto, Tata Wijayanta
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
