Director of Legislation Litigation of the Law and Human Rights Ministry Ninik Hariwanti representing the Government delivering her statement in the judicial review of Law Number 40 of 2007 on Limited Liability Companies (PT), Tuesday (8/5) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

Law No. 40/2007 on Limited Liability Companies (PT Law) is considered to have accommodated the profession of liquidators. This was stated by the Director of Legislation Litigation of the Law and Human Rights Ministry Ninik Hariwanti in the follow-up hearing of the a quo law held by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Tuesday (8/5).

Ninik denied the lack of clarity of the formulation in Articles 149, 150, 151, and 152 of the PT Law especially regarding the word "liquidator.” She added that these articles are the legal basis for liquidators in carrying out their profession. "The articles, in addition to being a legal basis, also guarantee the legal protection for the liquidator profession. Thus, the liquidators, in performing their functions and duties, are guaranteed by the law," she explained in the session presided over by Chief Justice Anwar Usman.

In addition, Ninik declared the Petitioners’ request, so that the liquidator profession could be equivalent to other professions such as curators, unfounded. She said that the two professions are essentially equivalent legally. "The word \'or\' in the formulation of the provisions of the a quo law signifies options. So it means the two are the same and not differentiated," said Ninik responding to case No. 29/PUU-XVI/2018.

As for the Petitioners’ view on the absence of professional certification for the liquidator, Nanik called it a domain of the professional organization. She stated that every professional organization is given freedom to build the foundation, limits, qualifications, and technical proficiency threshold of the profession. "In exercising the authority of the liquidator as well as the curator, the PT Law provides independence to show professionalism as a professional organization," she asserted.

A number of liquidators are registered as Petitioners of case No. 29/PUU-XVI/2018. They questioned the absence of clear requirements related to the liquidator profession. This has led to legal uncertainty and criminalization threat of the Petitioners\' profession. The Petitioners said that the factual losses that they suffered are that many non-Indonesian citizens (foreign) liquidators conduct liquidation practices on Indonesian legal entities or foreign companies in Indonesia. On the other hand, the potential loss that liquidators can suffer is the absence of legal protection due to unclear definition of the liquidator. This is seen as a cause to the criminalization of the liquidator profession. (ARS/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)