Frangky Jonatan (1), Richard C. Adam (2)
General Background: The Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation (PKPU) is an essential legal mechanism within Indonesia’s bankruptcy system that aims to provide debtors the opportunity to restructure their debts and avoid insolvency. Specific Background: However, in practice, several commercial courts have rejected PKPU applications based on the perceived small value of claims, even though Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and PKPU does not stipulate any minimum claim value as a prerequisite. Knowledge Gap: This inconsistency has created legal uncertainty and raised questions about the validity of such rejections in relation to the principles of justice and legal certainty. Aims: This study analyzes the legal basis and validity of PKPU rejections based on claim value and evaluates their conformity with the principles of justice and legal certainty in Indonesian law. Results: The normative legal analysis reveals that rejecting PKPU applications based solely on claim value lacks legal foundation, as it contradicts Article 222 of the Bankruptcy and PKPU Law, which only requires the existence of more than one creditor and a due and payable debt. Novelty: This research provides a comprehensive assessment of the normative gap causing judicial inconsistency in PKPU practices. Implications: The findings emphasize the need for regulatory reform or judicial guidelines to ensure that the PKPU mechanism is applied consistently, fairly, and in support of national legal and economic stability.
Highlights:
Legal inconsistency arises from rejecting PKPU based on claim value.
Such rejection contradicts Article 222 of the Bankruptcy and PKPU Law.
Reform is needed to ensure fairness and consistency in commercial court practice.
Keywords: PKPU, Bankruptcy Law, Legal Certainty, Justice, Claim Value
K. M. Ulina, H. Susetyo, and H. Saptono, “Akibat Hukum Putusan Penolakan PKPU Terhadap Debitor (Kajian Hukum Atas Putusan Pengadilan Niaga Jakarta Pusat Nomor: 28/Pkpu/2011/Pn. Niaga. Jkt. Pst.),” Diponegoro Law Journal, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 1–15, 2012.
R. Hartini, Hukum Kepailitan, 1st ed. Malang: UMM Press, 2012.
M. Fuady, Hukum Pailit, 1st ed. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2014.
R. C. Adam, F. Pratama, and A. Nugroho, Anatomi Hukum Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang. Depok: Rajawali Pers, 2021.
R. N. Kasdi and S. Margono, “Analisis Putusan Pengadilan Niaga Terkait Akibat Hukum Permohonan PKPU yang Diajukan oleh Pihak yang Tidak Berwenang (Studi Kasus Putusan Pengadilan Niaga pada Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat Nomor 24/Pdt. Sus-PKPU/2018/PN. Niaga. Jkt. Pst),” Jurnal Hukum Adigama, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1–10, 2019.
P. M. Marzuki, Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, 2009.
P. E. T. Dewi, “Implementasi Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU) Dalam Kepailitan Ditinjau dari Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang,” Jurnal Hukum Saraswati, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 285–300, 2019.
M. I. Maulana, “Penerapan Asas Keberlangsungan Usaha Dalam Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang untuk Mencegah Pailit (Studi Putusan No. 446/Pdt. Sus-PKPU/2021/PN Niaga JKT PST),” Media Hukum Indonesia, vol. 2, no. 7, pp. 1–10, 2025.
R. Saija, “Penyalahgunaan Keadaan dalam Prosedur Permohonan Pailit di Pengadilan Niaga,” Sasi, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 15–25, 2018.
K. N. Aulia, A. Lestari, L. M. Latief, and N. K. Fajarwati, “Kepastian Hukum dan Keadilan Hukum dalam Pandangan Ilmu Komunikasi,” Jurnal Sains Student Research, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 713–724, 2024.
I. R. Sibagariang, “Kepastian Hukum Terhadap Putusan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (Studi Putusan No. 20/Pdt. Sus-PKPU/2018/PN. Medan dan No. 21/Pdt. Sus-PKPU/2018/PN. Medan),” Jurnal Darma Agung, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2021.
T. Wijayanta, “Asas Kepastian Hukum, Keadilan dan Kemanfaatan dalam Kaitannya dengan Putusan Kepailitan Pengadilan Niaga,” Jurnal Dinamika Hukum, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 219–230, 2014.
P. Utomo, “Analisis Putusan Nomor 26/Pdt. Sus-Pailit/2021/PN Smg Tentang Permohonan Pailit PT. Nusantara Sinergi Logistik yang Diajukan oleh Kreditur,” Jurnal Global Hukum, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 350–360, 2025.
A. M. Tirayo and Y. Halim, “Problematik Definisi Harta Pailit dalam Kepailitan dan PKPU untuk Mencapai Kepastian Hukum,” Verstek: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 305–320, 2023.
S. Sihabudin and E. Adhitama, “Hak Kreditor dengan Tagihan Piutang Tertolak dalam Proses Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang,” Arena Hukum, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 90–100, 2023.