The judicial review hearing of the Law on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment, Monday (9/20/2021). Photo by Humas MK/Panji.

---

Monday, September 20, 2021 | 14:03 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) postponed the plenary examination hearing of case No. 23/PUU-XIX/2021 and No. 24/PUU-XIX/2021 on the material judicial review of Article 31 paragraph (1) of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment (PKPU) on Monday morning, September 20, 2021.

The plenary hearing had been scheduled to hear the House of Representatives (DPR) and the President. However, Chief Justice Anwar Usman stated that the House was absent and had sent a letter to notify the Court and that the Government had requested that the hearing be postponed.

“Today’s hearing was supposed to present the House and the President. The House was indisposed and the President’s counsel had sent a letter requesting that the hearing be postponed. Then, this hearing was postponed until Monday, October 18, 2021 at 11:00 WIB to hear the House and the President,” Justice Anwar said.

Also read: Absence of Cassation for Bankruptcy Cases Challenged

The case No. 23/PUU-XIX/2021 was filed by PT Sarana Yeoman Sembada, represented by executive director Sanglong a.k.a. Samad. He challenges Article 235 paragraph (1) and Article 293 paragraph (1) of the PKPU Law. He had been involved in several concrete cases on PKPU. His evidence for three previous cases was rejected. However, he received a different bankruptcy ruling in his fourth case. With the same evidence as the three previous cases, the fourth was accepted by the court, resulting in a positive ruling.

The Petitioner believes the two articles violate the 1945 Constitution and have been challenged and decided in the Decision No. 17/PUU-XVIII/2020, in which the entire petition was rejected. However, the case concerns the uncertainty of curator fees, which led to the bankruptcy declaration of PT Korea World Center Indonesia. Meanwhile, the current petition concerns inaccurate material evidentiary process that is in violation of justice and harms the Petitioner.

Therefore, in the initial petitum, the Petitioner requested that the Court declare Article 235 paragraph (1) and Article 293 paragraph (1) of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment unconstitutional and not legally binding, so that cassation and judicial review petitions can be filed to the Supreme Court for such cases.

Also read: Rejecting Bankruptcy Ruling, Petitioner Challenges Bankruptcy Law

The case No. 24/PUU-XIX/2021 was filed Calvin Bambang Hartono, a debtor at PT Bank Bukopin who took a loan with collateral in the form of land and property totaling 538 m2 under the name of Tjandra Liman with Ownership Certificate No. 189/Panjangjiwo Village. However, he has not received a land mortgage deed (APHT) of the loan.

At the preliminary hearing, he stated that Article 31 paragraph (1) of the Bankruptcy Law didn’t give any room for any individual, business, or legal entity that has been declared bankrupt when they, like the Petitioner, has taken legal measures on their case. In the petitum, the Petitioner requests that the Court declare the phrase “The decision of declaration of bankruptcy shall have the consequences that all judgment related to any part of Debtor’s assets established before the declaration of bankruptcy shall be immediately ceased and as from that moment no decisions concerning imprisonment for debt may be executed” as referred to in Article 31 paragraph (1) of Law No. 37 of 2004 not legally binding.

Writer        : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : M. Halim
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 9/21/2021 11:49 WIB

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.

---