Legal Status of the Object of the Fiduciary Determined as State Confiscated Goods that Have Been Auctioned

Authors

  • Martin Batara Tambunan Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta
  • Suherman Suherman Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta
  • Heru Sugiyono Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62951/ijls.v2i3.615

Keywords:

Auction, Fiduciary Collateral Object, State-Confiscated Assets

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze the legal status of fiduciary collateral objects designated as state-confiscated assets that have been auctioned, and to examine the resolution of the state's rights in confiscating and auctioning fiduciary collateral objects in relation to the rights of financing companies as fiduciary creditors whose claims remain unsettled. This study employs a normative juridical research method using statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. The results show that fiduciary collateral objects confiscated and auctioned by the state do not automatically nullify the creditor’s rights, as the principle of droit de suite entitles creditors to claim the object or the proceeds from its sale. Regulatory ambiguity creates legal uncertainty and discourages fiduciary-based financing practices. From a justice perspective, the state must not arbitrarily execute assets without considering the legitimate rights of creditors. Resolution of the conflict between the rights of the state and creditors must be carried out proportionally through criminal, civil, or non-litigation avenues, in order to establish a balance between law enforcement and creditor protection, thereby maintaining stability in the financing sector.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

A. Dwi, Makna Indonesia sebagai negara hukum. Program Pascasarjana UMSU, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://pascasarjana.umsu.ac.id/makna-indonesia-sebagai-negara-hukum/

C. A. Siwi, “Aspek hukum benda tidak bergerak sebagai obyek jaminan fidusia,” Jurnal Notariil, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 13–22, 2017, doi: 10.22225/jn.2.1.150.13-22.

D. Huri, “Perkembangan konsep dasar jaminan fidusia dalam praktik,” Ma’mal: Jurnal Laboratorium Syariah dan Hukum, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 253–271, 2022, doi: 10.15642/mal.v3i3.145.

E. S. Prasetyo, “Implikasi putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 terhadap pelaksanaan eksekusi lembaga jaminan,” Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 43–62, 2020, doi: 10.24246/jrh.2020.v5.i1.p43-62.

M. Boot, “The aim of a theory of justice,” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 7–21, 2012, doi: 10.1007/s10677-011-9308-5.

O. H. Tion, Fidusia sebagai jaminan unsur-unsur perikatan. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia, 1985.

P. M. Marzuki, Penelitian hukum normatif. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, 2010.

R. Usman, “Makna pengalihan hak kepemilikan benda objek jaminan fidusia atas dasar kepercayaan,” Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, vol. 28, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.20885/iustum.vol28.iss1.art7.

S. A. Wiraguna, “Metode normatif dan empiris dalam penelitian hukum: Studi eksploratif di Indonesia,” Public Sphere: Jurnal Sosial Politik, Pemerintahan dan Hukum, vol. 3, no. 3, 2024, doi: 10.59818/jps.v3i3.1390.

S. Bertea, “Towards a new paradigm of legal certainty,” Legisprudence, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 25–45, 2008, doi: 10.1080/17521467.2008.11424672.

T. H. Simatupang, N. Apriansyah, T. W. A. Nugroho, E. J. Sinaga, A. R. Ginting, and A. Nurhayati, “Choosing a copyright assessment method in evaluating a fiduciary guarantee object in Indonesia,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210506.042

Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.

Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia.

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana.

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata.

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana.

Downloads

Published

2025-06-02

How to Cite

Martin Batara Tambunan, Suherman Suherman, & Heru Sugiyono. (2025). Legal Status of the Object of the Fiduciary Determined as State Confiscated Goods that Have Been Auctioned. International Journal of Law and Society, 2(3), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.62951/ijls.v2i3.615