Petitioner during the ruling hearing for the Decision of Case Number 72/PUU-XXIII/2025 Material Testing of Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Position of Notary as amended by Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning Amendments to Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Position of Notary; Law Number 4 of 1996 concerning Mortgage Rights on Land and Objects Related to Land; and Law Number 20 of 2011 concerning Flats, Thursday (3/7/2025). Public Relations/Bay

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) - The Constitutional Court (MK) cannot accept the material review of Article 15 paragraph (2) letter f of Law No. 30 of 2004 on the Notary Profession as amended by Law No. 2 of 2014 on the Amendment to Law No. 30 of 2004 on the Notary Profession; Article 1 paragraph (4) of Law No. 4 of 1996 on Land Mortgage and Objects Related to the Land (Mortgage Law); and Article 44 paragraph (1) of Law No. 20 of 2011 on Condominiums and its elucidation.

Regarding Case Number 72/PUU-XXIII/2025 filed by Anisitus Amanat, the Court in its legal considerations read by Chief Justice Suhartoyo stated that the Petitioner in outlining the legal standing only outlined a concrete case regarding the rejection of his status as a land deed officials (PPAT). In addition, there was also a verbal request from one of the officials of the Ministry of Law for the Petitioner as a Notary to postpone signing until the issuance of the implementing regulations of the Constitutional Court Decision which provides a basis for retirement up to the age of 70 without being given a retirement decree.

Also, the Petitioner did not mention the norms of the Article of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia that guarantee his constitutional rights as well as the norms of the applicable laws and are considered detrimental to his constitutional rights. According to Chief Justice Suhartoyo, the Petitioner should have explained such matters as required in the provisions contained in PMK 2/2021.

"Regarding the requirement for the assumption of constitutional loss to have legal standing in filing an application, the Court considers that the Petitioner cannot prove that his constitutional rights have been violated by the law being reviewed. Therefore, the Court concludes that the Petitioner does not have legal standing in filing the a quo petition," said Chief Justice Suhartoyo reading out the Court's legal considerations.

Also read:

Notary Questions Notary’s Authority to Make Land Deeds
Notary Reaffirms Right to Draft Land Deeds

Previously, the Petitioner argued that Article 15 paragraph (2) letter f of the Notary Law implicitly affirms the right and responsibility of notaries to produce all types of land-related deeds, unless expressly regulated otherwise by the Notary Law or sectoral laws. However, he contended that in practice, this authority has been undermined as the government favors Land Deed Officials (PPAT) in performing such tasks. This preference, he said, is problematic given that the legal authority of PPATs derives merely from government regulations and not from statutory law.

Meanwhile, based on Article 43 paragraph (1) of the Condominium Law, the sale and purchase of a condominium unit prior to construction can be done through a sale and purchase agreement (PPJB) before a notary. Then, Article 44 paragraph (1) and its elucidation stipulates that the sale and purchase of a fully-constructed condominium unit is done through a sale and purchase deed made before a notary who is also a land deed official, as regulated under the Government Regulation (PP) No. 37 of 1998 in conjunction with the Government Regulation No. 24 of 2016. The Petitioner believes that no other regulations exist as a basis for land deed officials in the Indonesian legal system other than those two. With the granting of the authority to land deed officials, he argued, the Government/State has restricted notaries from exercising their constitutional right and obligation to make deeds relating to agrarian affairs. In other words, they do not recognize this specific right of notaries.

Author       : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Tiara Agustina
Translator  : SO

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.

Full decision No. 72/PUU-XXIII/2025 can be read here.

---