The judicial review hearing of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment to examine the revised petition, Wednesday (2/22/2023). Photo by MKRI/Ilham W. M.

---

Wednesday, February 22, 2023 | 11:07 WIB

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held another hearing for the judicial review of Article 31 paragraph (1) of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment (Bankruptcy Law) and its elucidation on Wednesday, February 22, 2023. The case No. 11/PUU-XXI/2023 was filed by curators Umar Husin, Zentoni, Sahat Tambunan, Paulus Djawa.

Through Donny Tri Istiqomah, the Petitioners conveyed revisions to the petition before Constitutional Justices Enny Nurbaningsih, Suhartoyo, and M. Guntur Hamzah. They had added Constitutional Court Regulation (PMK) No. 2 of 2021, especially Article 4 paragraph (2), strengthened their legal standing to support their constitutional right as referred to in Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

“The constitutional impairment had been explained systematically. The Petitioners are Indonesian curators who [had been inaugurated] through a decree. In this hearing, the Petitioners challenge two articles: the elucidation to Article 31 paragraph (1) and Article 55 paragraph (1) of the Bankruptcy Law. Because the elucidation to the a quo Law does not include an exception to Article 59 of the Bankruptcy Law [relating to] the execution of decisions on bankruptcy, this has put the Petitioners at disadvantage,” Donny explained.

Donny said the Petitioners had suffered concrete constitutional impairment due to the Bankruptcy Decree No. 1 of 2022 on April 2, 2022. The execution of bankruptcy was issued on March 15, 2022, so based on the a quo article, there were only two months for the execution. The Petitioners also added a point that the a quo article had reduced norms, leading to legal uncertainty.

Also read: Bankruptcy Law Reducing Authority, Curators Files Petition

At the preliminary hearing on Wednesday, February 8, the Petitioners asserted that Article 31 paragraph (1) of the Bankruptcy Law had led to legal uncertainty as they have been in constant legal debates with separatist creditors whose debtors defaulted. Such creditors reject compliance with the article, thus, leading to complete elimination or at least reduction of the Petitioners’ authority to take over and sell assets of the defaulted debtors, which are in fact granted by the Law.

There is indeed special treatment for separatist creditors, who can also execute bankruptcy as per Article 55 of the Bankruptcy Law, but not without following procedure as set in Articles 56-59 of the Law.

Therefore, the Petitioners requested that the Court declare the elucidation to Article 31 paragraph (1) of the Bankruptcy Law legally invalid and repeal it due to the ambiguity of Article 31 paragraph (1), which has impaired the Petitioners’ constitutional rights, led to injustice and legal uncertainty, and is in violation of Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

Writer        : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Andhini S.F.
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 2/24/2023 14:16 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.

---