[
ABSTRAK Bank dalam menjalankan kegiatan usahanya tidak terlepas dari suatu risiko kerugian,
untuk itu dalam Undang-Undang perbankan indonesia Bank dalam menjalankan
usahanya harus berdasarkan prinsip kehati-hatian. Kredit usaha rakyat merupakan kredit
program pemerintah dimana Bank merupakan pihak yang menyalurkan KUR tersebut
kepada UMKMK, dimana dana dalam penyaluran KUR merupakan 100% (seratus
persen) dana Bank. Salah satu Bank yang ditunjuk pemerintah untuk menyalurkan KUR
adalah Bank X. Bank X telah menyalurkan KUR kepada UMKMK salah satunya
pemberian KUR Grup PT. KMS sebagai penjamin dari 20 (dua puluh) petani ubi rambat.
PT. KMS tidak dapat melakukan kewajiban pembayaran sehingga mengakibatkan kredit
menjadi macet. KUR yang disalurkan oleh Bank dijaminkan oleh pemerintah kepada
Perusahaan Penjamin, Bank X mengajukan klaim kepada PT. ASKRINDO, akan tetapi
klaim tersebut ditolak karena ada indikasi kredit fiktif. SKAI Bank X melakukan
investigasi atas dugaan tersebut dan menemukan bahwa 20 (dua puluh) debitur tersebut
fiktif, ditemukan adanya pemalsuan identitas kedua puluh petani ubi rambat tersebut. PT.
KMS dengan sengaja melakukan pemalsuan serta penipuan, hal ini diketahui oleh
pegawai Bank X terkait pemberian KUR, hal tersebut dilakukan untuk mendapatkan
fasilitas KUR dari Bank X. Berdasarkan hal tersebut terdapat 2 (dua) permasalahan
dalam penelitian ini yaitu Bagaimanakah penerapan prinsip kehati-hatian dalam
pemberian kredit usaha rakyat pada Bank X ? dan Bagaimanakah akibat hukum bagi
Bank X dan PT. KMS dalam hal terjadinya kredit fiktif?. Bank X memiliki standar
operasional prosedur dalam pemberian kredit berdasarkan prinsip kehati-hatian namun
Bank X cabang Binjai, Medan tidak melaksanakan langkah-langkah sesuai prosedur
pemberian kredit, hal ini membutkikan bahwa Bank X cabang binjai tidak menerapkan
prinsip kehati-hatian. Akibat hukum dalam hal terjadinya kredit fiktif baik PT. KMS
maupun pegawai Bank yang terlibat dalam kredit fiktif ini dapat dikenai sanksi pidana
berdasarkan Undang-Undang perbankan dan Kitab Undang Undang Hukum Pidana
Indonesia.
ABSTRACTThe Bank in carrying out its business activities not in spite of a risk of a loss, for it in
Indonesian banking law Banks in the running of his business must be based on the
principle of prudence. The people's credit business loan government programs in
which the Bank is funneling the KUR to the UMKMK, where the distribution of
funds in the KUR is a 100% (one hundred percent) of Bank funds. One of the
Government-designated Banks to channel KUR is Bank X Bank X has been
funneling. KUR to UMKMK one of them granting KUR Group PT. KMS as
guarantors of 20 (twenty) Yam farmers. PT. KMS cannot make a payment obligation
resulting in a credit being jammed. KUR transmitted by banks pledged by the
Government to the company's Underwriters, Bank X claim to the PT. ASKRINDO,
but the claim is rejected because there are indications of fictitious credits. SKAI Bank
X APHIS these allegations and found that 20 (twenty) of the fictitious debtors, found
an impersonation of the twentieth the Yam farmers. PT. KMS with deliberate forgery
and fraud, it is known by the Bank employee X related awarding of KUR, it is done
to get facilities from Bank X kur. based on this there are 2 (two) problems in this
study i.e. How is the application of the principle of prudence in granting business
credit the people at Bank X? and how is the legal consequences for the Bank and PT
KMS in terms of occurrence of fictitious credits?. Bank X has a standard operational
procedures in the granting of credit is based on the principle of prudence but Bank
branch Binjai, Medan X does not implement appropriate procedural measures
granting credit, it is membutkikan that the Bank does not implement binjai branch X
principle of prudence. The legal consequences in case of occurrence of fictitious
credits good PT. KMS or Bank employee involved in this fictitious credit may be
subject to criminal sanctions under the laws of the Banking Law and the Criminal law
of Indonesia.;The Bank in carrying out its business activities not in spite of a risk of a loss, for it in
Indonesian banking law Banks in the running of his business must be based on the
principle of prudence. The people's credit business loan government programs in
which the Bank is funneling the KUR to the UMKMK, where the distribution of
funds in the KUR is a 100% (one hundred percent) of Bank funds. One of the
Government-designated Banks to channel KUR is Bank X Bank X has been
funneling. KUR to UMKMK one of them granting KUR Group PT. KMS as
guarantors of 20 (twenty) Yam farmers. PT. KMS cannot make a payment obligation
resulting in a credit being jammed. KUR transmitted by banks pledged by the
Government to the company's Underwriters, Bank X claim to the PT. ASKRINDO,
but the claim is rejected because there are indications of fictitious credits. SKAI Bank
X APHIS these allegations and found that 20 (twenty) of the fictitious debtors, found
an impersonation of the twentieth the Yam farmers. PT. KMS with deliberate forgery
and fraud, it is known by the Bank employee X related awarding of KUR, it is done
to get facilities from Bank X kur. based on this there are 2 (two) problems in this
study i.e. How is the application of the principle of prudence in granting business
credit the people at Bank X? and how is the legal consequences for the Bank and PT
KMS in terms of occurrence of fictitious credits?. Bank X has a standard operational
procedures in the granting of credit is based on the principle of prudence but Bank
branch Binjai, Medan X does not implement appropriate procedural measures
granting credit, it is membutkikan that the Bank does not implement binjai branch X
principle of prudence. The legal consequences in case of occurrence of fictitious
credits good PT. KMS or Bank employee involved in this fictitious credit may be
subject to criminal sanctions under the laws of the Banking Law and the Criminal law
of Indonesia.;The Bank in carrying out its business activities not in spite of a risk of a loss, for it in
Indonesian banking law Banks in the running of his business must be based on the
principle of prudence. The people's credit business loan government programs in
which the Bank is funneling the KUR to the UMKMK, where the distribution of
funds in the KUR is a 100% (one hundred percent) of Bank funds. One of the
Government-designated Banks to channel KUR is Bank X Bank X has been
funneling. KUR to UMKMK one of them granting KUR Group PT. KMS as
guarantors of 20 (twenty) Yam farmers. PT. KMS cannot make a payment obligation
resulting in a credit being jammed. KUR transmitted by banks pledged by the
Government to the company's Underwriters, Bank X claim to the PT. ASKRINDO,
but the claim is rejected because there are indications of fictitious credits. SKAI Bank
X APHIS these allegations and found that 20 (twenty) of the fictitious debtors, found
an impersonation of the twentieth the Yam farmers. PT. KMS with deliberate forgery
and fraud, it is known by the Bank employee X related awarding of KUR, it is done
to get facilities from Bank X kur. based on this there are 2 (two) problems in this
study i.e. How is the application of the principle of prudence in granting business
credit the people at Bank X? and how is the legal consequences for the Bank and PT
KMS in terms of occurrence of fictitious credits?. Bank X has a standard operational
procedures in the granting of credit is based on the principle of prudence but Bank
branch Binjai, Medan X does not implement appropriate procedural measures
granting credit, it is membutkikan that the Bank does not implement binjai branch X
principle of prudence. The legal consequences in case of occurrence of fictitious
credits good PT. KMS or Bank employee involved in this fictitious credit may be
subject to criminal sanctions under the laws of the Banking Law and the Criminal law
of Indonesia., The Bank in carrying out its business activities not in spite of a risk of a loss, for it in
Indonesian banking law Banks in the running of his business must be based on the
principle of prudence. The people's credit business loan government programs in
which the Bank is funneling the KUR to the UMKMK, where the distribution of
funds in the KUR is a 100% (one hundred percent) of Bank funds. One of the
Government-designated Banks to channel KUR is Bank X Bank X has been
funneling. KUR to UMKMK one of them granting KUR Group PT. KMS as
guarantors of 20 (twenty) Yam farmers. PT. KMS cannot make a payment obligation
resulting in a credit being jammed. KUR transmitted by banks pledged by the
Government to the company's Underwriters, Bank X claim to the PT. ASKRINDO,
but the claim is rejected because there are indications of fictitious credits. SKAI Bank
X APHIS these allegations and found that 20 (twenty) of the fictitious debtors, found
an impersonation of the twentieth the Yam farmers. PT. KMS with deliberate forgery
and fraud, it is known by the Bank employee X related awarding of KUR, it is done
to get facilities from Bank X kur. based on this there are 2 (two) problems in this
study i.e. How is the application of the principle of prudence in granting business
credit the people at Bank X? and how is the legal consequences for the Bank and PT
KMS in terms of occurrence of fictitious credits?. Bank X has a standard operational
procedures in the granting of credit is based on the principle of prudence but Bank
branch Binjai, Medan X does not implement appropriate procedural measures
granting credit, it is membutkikan that the Bank does not implement binjai branch X
principle of prudence. The legal consequences in case of occurrence of fictitious
credits good PT. KMS or Bank employee involved in this fictitious credit may be
subject to criminal sanctions under the laws of the Banking Law and the Criminal law
of Indonesia.]
T42706-Nurrahmah Soraya Lubis.pdf :: Unduh