Hauwra Ananda (1), Richard C. Adam (2)
General Background: The Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) serves as a preventive legal mechanism in Indonesian economic law, allowing debtors to restructure obligations and avoid bankruptcy. Specific Background: However, after the Constitutional Court Decision No. 23/PUU-XIX/2021, which opened the possibility of cassation against PKPU rulings, debtors began to exploit this right, filing multiple cassations that delay dispute resolution. Knowledge Gap: Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and PKPU does not explicitly regulate the frequency or limits of cassation filings, creating a normative void and inconsistency in judicial interpretation. Aims: This study aims to analyze legal obstacles and identify appropriate normative frameworks for regulating repeated cassation filings from the perspective of legal certainty. Results: The findings reveal that multiple cassations by debtors contradict the principles of procedural finality, efficiency, and fairness, undermining creditors’ rights and the integrity of commercial court processes. Novelty: The study highlights the urgent need for explicit legislative or Supreme Court guidelines limiting cassation frequency in PKPU to prevent abuse of process. Implications: Strengthening legal certainty in PKPU procedures through regulatory reform will ensure fairness, procedural clarity, and balance between debtor and creditor rights within Indonesia’s commercial justice system.
Highlights:
Repeated cassation filings undermine the principle of legal finality.
Lack of clear regulation in Law No. 37 of 2004 creates legal uncertainty.
Reform is needed to limit cassation frequency and ensure procedural fairness.
Keywords: PKPU, Cassation, Legal Certainty, Debtor-Creditor, Normative Gap
D. T. Muryati, D. Septiandani, and E. Yulistyowati, “Pengaturan Tanggung Jawab Kurator terhadap Pengurusan dan Pemberesan Harta Pailit dalam Kaitannya dengan Hak Kreditor Separatis,” Jurnal Dinamika Sosial dan Budaya, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 11–21, 2017.
E. Yuhassarie and T. Harnowo, Masalah-Masalah Kepailitan dan Wawasan Hukum Bisnis Lainnya: Pemikiran Kembali Hukum Kepailitan Indonesia, in Rangkaian Lokakarya Terbatas. Jakarta, Indonesia: Pusat Pengkajian Hukum dan Masyarakat, 2005, p. 29.
F. Y. P. Amboro, “Restrukturisasi Utang terhadap Perusahaan Go Public dalam Kepailitan dan PKPU,” Masalah-Masalah Hukum, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 103–111, 2020.
C. S. Sakti, R. A. Maramis, and G. Tampongangoy, “Analisis Hukum Penyelesaian Perkara Akibat Kepailitan Berdasarkan Keputusan PKPU,” Jurnal Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sam Ratulangi Lex Privatum, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 88–99, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/infografik/perbedaan-kepailitan-dan-pkpu
M. Ihsan and T. Widyaningrum, “Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tentang Terbukanya Upaya Hukum Kasasi atas Putusan PKPU,” Jurnal Ius Constitutionale, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 334–336, 2023.
F. Salsabila, “Upaya Hukum Kasasi pada Putusan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang Ditinjau dari Corporate Rescue Doctrine,” Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Kenotariatan, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 145–160, 2023, doi: 10.28946/rpt.v12i2.3141.
M. L. Chakim, “Mewujudkan Keadilan melalui Upaya Hukum Peninjauan Kembali Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi,” Jurnal Konstitusi, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 327–345, 2015.
S. Soekanto and S. Mahmudji, Penelitian Hukum Normatif: Suatu Tinjauan Singkat. Jakarta, Indonesia: Raja Grafindo Persada, 2003.
F. Salsabila, “Upaya Hukum Kasasi pada Putusan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang Ditinjau dari Corporate Rescue Doctrine,” Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Kenotariatan, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 150, 2023.
A. Sutedi, Hukum Kepailitan. Jakarta, Indonesia: Ghalia Indonesia, 2009.
I. D. A. Suci, M. H. Shubhan, H. Poesoko, R. Murjiyanto, M. Z. M. Zahir, and Sudiyana, “Prinsip Sistemik Lembaga Perdamaian PKPU untuk Mencapai Nilai Keadilan,” Media Iuris, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 299–322, 2024, doi: 10.20473/mi.v7i2.55386.
R. P. Berutu, H. Iskandar, and D. Syahputra, “Analisis Kepastian Hukum Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 tentang Uji Formil Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 tentang Cipta Kerja,” Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sumatera Utara (JIM FH), vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 10–18, 2023.
A. Setiawan, “Penalaran Hukum yang Mampu Mewujudkan Tujuan Hukum secara Proporsional,” Jurnal Hukum Mimbar Justitia, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 205–212, 2017.
M. Fuady, Hukum Pailit dalam Teori dan Praktek. Bandung, Indonesia: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2010.
S. Mertokusumo, Penemuan Hukum: Sebuah Pengantar. Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Liberty, 2010.