Riwayat: Educational Journal of History and Humanities
Implementation of Article 66 UUJN Related to Suits Against Notaries Without the Approval of the Honorary Council of Notaries (MKN)
Abstract
Article 66 of the UUJN mandates prior approval from the Notary Honorary Council (Majelis Kehormatan Notaris, MKN) for lawsuits against notaries in Indonesia, aiming to protect their professional independence. This study examines the effectiveness, challenges, comparative insights, and reform recommendations regarding Article 66. Effectiveness analysis reveals that while the provision shields notaries from frivolous litigation, it impedes access to justice due to procedural complexities and delays. Transparency issues in MKN decision-making and perceived biases further complicate its implementation. Comparative insights from France, Germany, and the United States highlight best practices such as independent oversight mechanisms and transparent criteria, suggesting reforms to enhance accountability and fairness. Recommendations include establishing clear, public criteria for MKN approvals, setting procedural timelines, and introducing independent review mechanisms to address bias concerns. These reforms aim to maintain notarial integrity while ensuring equitable access to justice. Thus, while Article 66 serves to safeguard notarial functions, addressing its challenges through strategic reforms can foster public trust and strengthen Indonesia's legal framework.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Abqa, M. A. R., Hidayah, A., Sitanggang, C. E. P., Annisa, F., Khasanah, D. D., Tarmizi, R., & Ramadhani, D. W. (2024). Peradilan & Penegakan Hukum. Sada Kurnia Pustaka.
Andhika, A. R. (2016). Pertanggungjawaban Notaris Dalam Perkara Pidana Berkaitan Dengan Akta Yang Dibuatnya Menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 Tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004. Premise Law Journal, 1, 14144.
Ariawan, I. G. K. (2013). Metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif. Kertha Widya, 1(1).
Arisaputra, M. I. (2012). Kewajiban Notaris Dalam Menjaga Kerahasiaan Akta Dalam Kaitannya dengan Hak Ingkar Notaris. Perspektif, 17(3), 173–183.
Arliman, L. (2016). IMPLIKASI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM MENGUJI UNDANG UNDANG TENTANG JABATAN NOTARIS TERHADAP PENGAWASAN NOTARIS. Jurnal Hukum Respublica, 16(1), 71–87.
Arruñada, B. (2023). The organization of public registries: a comparative analysis. In The Changing Role of Property Law (pp. 199–220). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Basoeky, U., Priyono, F. J., Badriyah, S. M., & Sukirno, S. (2021). Law and Technology: Legal Technology Model under the Authority of the Indonesian Notary Position in the Industrial Revolution Era 4.0. Legal Brief, 11(1), 353–365.
Bush, R. A. B. (1984). Dispute resolution alternatives and the goals of civil justice: Jurisdictional principles for process choice. Wis. L. Rev., 893.
Grady, C. (2015). Institutional review boards: Purpose and challenges. Chest, 148(5), 1148–1155.
Greene, S. S. (2015). Race, class, and access to civil justice. Iowa L. Rev., 101, 1263.
Grimmelikhuijsen, S., & Klijn, A. (2015). The effects of judicial transparency on public trust: Evidence from a field experiment. Public Administration, 93(4), 995–1011.
Hall, M. A. (2002). Law, medicine, and trust. Stan. L. Rev., 55, 463.
Hammond, C. M., & Landini, I. (2012). Global Subprime Crisis as Explained by the Contrast between American Contracts Law and Civil Law Countries’ Laws, Practices, and Expectations in Real Estate Transactions: How the Lack of Informed Consent and the Absence of the Civil Law Notary in the Unit. J. Int’l Bus. & L., 11, 133.
Macchia, M. (2016). The rule of law and transparency in the global space. In Research Handbook on Global Administrative Law (pp. 261–281). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Muhaimin, M. (2020). Metode Penelitian Hukum. Dalam S. Dr. Muhaimin, Metode Penelitian Hukum, Mataram-NTB: Mataram.
O’Neill, O. (2004). Accountability, trust and informed consent in medical practice and research. Clinical Medicine, 4(3), 269–276.
Rani, F. A., & Ali, D. (2019). Kedudukan Notaris Sebagai Pejabat Umum Ditinjau Dari Konsep Equality Before The Law. Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan, 49(1), 180–201.
Robertson, C. B. (2009). Judgment Identity and Independence. CoNN. L. REv., 42, 1.
Shapiro, S. A., & Murphy, R. W. (2016). Arbitrariness Review Made Reasonable: Structural and Conceptual Reform of the Hard Look. Notre Dame L. Rev., 92, 331.
Siahaan, M. (2022). Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia (edisi kedua). Sinar Grafika.
Soekanto, S. (2007). Penelitian hukum normatif: Suatu tinjauan singkat.
Supriadi, S. H. (2023). Etika dan Tanggung Jawab Profesi Hukum di Indonesia. Sinar Grafika.
Syarifuddin, M. (2020). Small Claim Court: Dalam Sistem Peradilan Perdata di Indonesia.
Tyler, T. R., Goff, P. A., & MacCoun, R. J. (2015). The impact of psychological science on policing in the United States: Procedural justice, legitimacy, and effective law enforcement. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16(3), 75–109.
Wahyuni, S. (2021). Analisis Wewenang Notaris Dalam Pembuatan Akta Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli Hak Milik Atas Tanah Di Kota Makassar. UNIVERSITAS BOSOWA.
Wibowo, A. (2023). Penyelesaian Sengketa Hukum dan Teknologi. Penerbit Yayasan Prima Agus Teknik, 1–168.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/jr.v7i3.39933
Article Metrics
Abstract view : 0 timesPDF - 0 times
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Riwayat: Educational of History and Humanities indexed by
___________________________________________________________
Riwayat: Educational of History and Humanities
E-ISSN 2775-5037
P-ISSN 2614-3917
Published by History Education Department, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Syiah Kuala, Province Aceh. Indonesia
W :https://jurnal.usk.ac.id/riwayat
E : riwayat@usk.ac.id
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.