Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"[ABSTRAKPenjualan lelang eksekusi gadai saham melalui pelelangan umum harus dilakukan oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas I di Kantor Pelayanan Kekayaan Negara dan Lelang (KPKNL). Namun pada prakteknya lelang terdapat lelang eksekusi gadai saham yang dilaksanakan oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas II dan dilakukan di Balai Lelang Swasta sebagaimana dituangkan dalam risalah lelang nomor RL-0XX/2011. Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mengetahui bagaimanakah sebenarnya kewenangan pejabat lelang, khususnya Pejabat Lelang Kelas II, dalam melaksanakan lelang gadai atas saham serta bagaimanakah dampak pelanggaran kewenangan pejabat lelang terhadap lelang yang telah dilaksanakan tersebut. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan metode yuridis normatif, yaitu dengan memperhatikan risalah lelang yang telah diterbitkan oleh Pejabat Lelang dan diperbandingkan terhadap ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku berkenaan dengan lelang. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa dalam hal terjadi pelanggaran kewenangan pejabat lelang dalam melaksanakan lelang, maka terhadap pejabat lelang tersebut akan dinyatakan melanggar ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan di bidang lelang dan izinnya sebagai Pejabat Lelang dapat dikenakan sanksi berupa pembebastugasan untuk jangka waktu tertentu. Pejabat Lelang tersebut juga berkewajiban untuk mengganti kerugian yang ditimbulkan. Selain itu, terhadap lelang yang dilaksanakan tanpa kewenangan pejabat lelang, maka lelang tersebut dianggap batal demi hukum. Namun prosedur pembatalan lelang yang batal demi hukum belum diatur lebih lanjut dalam ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan lelang yang ada saat ini.

---

ABSTRACTShares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer?s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia.;Shares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer?s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia.;Shares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer?s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia., Shares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer’s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia.]"

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai keabsahan akta risalah lelang terhadap objek lelangyang tidak berada dalam wilayah jabatan Pejabat Lelang Kelas II Studi KasusPT. M Finance Pekanbaru dan Pejabat Lelang Kelas II Bekasi . Objek lelangdalam tesis ini berada di wilayah Pekanbaru, sedangkan akta risalah lelang dibuatoleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas II Bekasi. Dalam praktiknya, terdapat Pejabat Lelangyang membuat akta risalah lelang yang objeknya tidak berada dalam wilayahjabatannya. Praktik ini tidak sesuai dengan peraturan yang diberikan dalamPeraturan Menteri Keuangan tentang Petunjuk Pelaksanaan Lelang yangmenetapkan bahwa seorang pejabat lelang hanya bisa mengeluarkan akta risalahlelang yang objeknya berada dalam wilayah jabatannya. Oleh karena itu, masalahpenelitian yang dibahas dalam tesis ini adalah bagaimana keabsahan akta risalahlelang terhadap objek lelang yang tidak berada dalam wilayah jabatan PejabatLelang Kelas II dan bagaimana akibat hukum bagi Pejabat Lelang Kelas II yangmembuat akta risalah lelang terkait objek lelang yang tidak berada dalam wilayahjabatannya. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif. Teknikpengumpulan data menggunakan studi dokumen. Hasil penelitian menemukanbahwa akta risalah lelang yang objeknya tidak berada dalam wilayah jabatanPejabat Lelang Kelas II adalah tidak sah. Risalah Lelang tidak dapatdiklasifikasikan sebagai akta otentik, namun menjadi akta biasa dan akibat hukumdari kasus ini adalah Pejabat Lelang dapat diberhentikan dengan tidak hormat. Kata Kunci : Lelang, Risalah Lelang, Pejabat Lelang

---

This thesis discusses the validity of an auction deed of auction objects which arenot in the jurisdiction of the Class II Auctioneer A Case Study of PT M FinancePekanbaru and the Class II Auctioneer of Bekasi . The auction objects in thisthesis were in Pekanbaru territory while the legal document of the auction, namelyRisalah Lelang, was made by a Class II Auctioneer in Bekasi. In practice, therewas an Auctioneer making a Risalah Lelang of several auction objects which werenot in his her legal territory. This practice was not in conformity with the rulesgiven in the Minister of Finance Regulation concerning the Auction Directivewhich stipulates that an Auctioneer can only issue auction deeds of auction objectwithin his her jurisdiction. Therefore, the research issues discussed in this thesisare the validity of the auction deed of auction objects which are not within theClass II Auctioneer rsquo s jurisdiction and its legal consequences for the Class IIAuctioneer who conducts the auction. The research method used in this theseswas normative juridical. Data collection technique used was the study ofdocuments. The research found that the auction deed of auction objects which areoutside the jurisdiction of the competent Auctioneer are not valid. The RisalahLelang can not be classified as an authentic deed, but becomes an ordinary deedand the legal effect of this case is the Auctioneer can be dishonorably discharged. Keywords Auction, Auction Deed, Auctioneer."

"ABSTRAKKeluhan kantor-kantor lelang di daerah mengenai tidak meratanya pendapatan dari penjualan lelang, serta kekhawatiran akan timbulnya gugatan terhadap tempat pelaksanaan lelang lintas wilayah sehubungan dengan otentisitas risalah lelang merupakan alasan dihapuskannya dispensasi tempat lelang oleh Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Nomor 106/PMK.06/2013. Tesis ini akan menganalisis mengenai otentisitas risalah lelang yang dibuat berdasarkan dispensasi tempat lelang, dan dampak penghapusan dispensasi tempat lelang terhadap kinerja balai lelang dan notaris sebagai pejabat lelang kelas II. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif atau penelitian hukum kepustakaan. Sedangkan hasil penelitian ialah bahwa pemberian dispensasi tempat lelang tidak mengurangi otentisitas risalah lelang dan dampak penghapusan dispensasi tempat lelang adalah penurunan kinerja balai lelang serta notaris sebagai pejabat lelang kelas II.

---

ABSTRACT

Due to complaints from several state auction offices concerning the declining of state revenues derived from auctions, as well as concerns about the emergence of lawsuits against the dispensation of auction location in relation to the authenticity of the auction deed, cause the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia issued Ministerial Regulation No. 106/PMK.06/2013. This thesis analyzes two things. First, it analyzes the relation between the dispensation of the auction location and the authenticity of the auction deed. Second, it analyzes the impact of the abolition of provisions concering the dispensation of the auction location on the performance of the auction house and the notary's performance as a class II officer auctions. Methodology used in this research is juridis normative, combined with interviews to several prominent persons. The result of this research is that the provisions on the dispensation of the auction location does not reduce the authenticity of the auction deed, and that the removal of the aforementioned provisions has an adverse impact on the declining of the performance of private auction houses and notaries as the class II auctioneers."

"ABSTRAKTesis ini membahas mengenai wanprestasi oleh pemenang lelang dalampelaksanaan lelang pada balai lelang swasta (Studi Kasus IBID-PT Balai LelangSerasi Pekanbaru). Dalam pelaksanaan lelang, seharusnya pemenang lelangmenyelesaikan pembayaran lelang. Namun dalam prakteknya, ternyata dijumpai banyak kasus dimana pembeli lelang tidak melaksanakan kewajibannya tepat waktu termasuk dalam pelaksanaan lelang di balai lelang. Oleh karena itu, permasalahan yang dibahas dalam tesis ini adalah tata cara pelaksanaan lelang serta kendala-kendala yang ditemui dan bentuk wanprestasi oleh pemenang lelang serta penyelesaiannya, khususnya di balai lelang IBID-PT Balai Lelang Serasi Pekanbaru. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah Yuridis Sosiologis. Teknik pengumpulan data menggunakan wawancara dan studi dokumen. Dalam hal pemenang lelang yang wanprestasi akan hangusnya uang jaminan sebesar Rp. 5.000.000,- (lima juta rupiah) dan Blacklist selama 6 (enam) bulan

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis discusses the tort by winning bidders of auctions conducted bya private auction house (a case study of the IBID-PT Balai Lelang Serasi, anauction house in Pekanbaru). In an auction, the winning bidders should fulfill allof the payment in of the auction on time. However, in practice, there were many cases where the winning bidder did not fulfill their obligations on time (tort), including in auctions at auction houses. Therefore, the problems discussed in this thesis are the implementation procedure of auction and constraints encountered and kind of default by the auction winner and its completion, particularly at auction IBID-PT Balai Lelang Serasi Pekanbaru. The research methods used in this thesis is Juridical Sociology. The technique of collecting data used in this research are interviews and documents study. The theses found that in case the winning bidder is in default, the deposit money, in this case Rp. 5.000.000,- (five million rupiah), will be forfeited by the auction house and the winning bidder will be blacklisted for 6 (six) months"

"ABSTRAKPejabat Lelang sebagai pejabat umum yang membuat akta autentik berupa Risalah Lelang, bertanggung jawab terhadap autentisitasnya. Pejabat Lelang juga bertanggung jawab terhadap legalitas formal subjek dan objek lelang, serta membantu permohonan lelang yang diajukan padanya. Lelang merupakan sistem jual beli secara terbuka yang handal, aman dan terpercaya, dan harus selalu dilakukan menurut prosedur yang berlaku. Lelang bertujuan untuk menjamin kepastian hukum dari segala bentuk pengalihan hak atas objek lelang. Namun demikian, pada pengalihan hak objek lelang pada Kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 481 K/TUN/2016, walaupun lelang telah dilakukan sesuai dengan prosedur yang berlaku, telah menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum dengan pembatalan objek lelangnya oleh Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara. Hal tersebut dapat menimbulkan ketidakpercayaan mengenai keamanan dan perlindungan hukum dari mekanisme lelang, sehingga pada akhirnya dapat menghambat perkembangan lelang noneksekusi sukarela di masyarakat. Berdasarkan kasus tersebut, maka tesis ini menguraikan pengalihan hak melalui mekanisme lelang noneksekusi sukarela untuk objek lelang yang dilakukan oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas II agar lebih menjamin perlindungan hukum bagi pembeli, dan tanggung jawab pejabat lelang kelas II terhadap objek lelang yang dibatalkan oleh Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara tersebut. Tesis ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan kualitatif bersifat deskriptif analitis. Dalam penelitian ini ditemukan bahwa terdapat kekeliruan di Badan Pertanahan Nasional BPN yang telah menerbitkan objek lelang ketika sedang dalam sengketa di Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara. Agar dimasa mendatang tidak terjadi kasus serupa yang dapat merugikan berbagai pihak, disarankan kepada Pejabat Lelang dan Peserta/Pembeli Lelang selalu menerapkan prinsip ketelitian dan kehati-hatian yaitu dengan meneliti dan mengetahui secara terperinci mengenai keadaan dan status hukum dari objek lelang dimaksud sebelum lelang dilaksanakan. Penulis menyarankan agar dibuat sistem verifikasi, pendaftaran, dan pengalihan hak atas tanah yang terintegrasi antara BPN dan Badan Peradilan Indonesia.Kata kunci:Pejabat Lelang, Lelang Noneksekusi Sukarela, Pengalihan Hak, Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Pembeli Lelang.

---

ABSTRACT An auctioneer is a public officer who creates an authentic deed of auctions. The auctioneer is responsible for the authenticity of the auction deeds and the formal legality of the subject and the object of the auction, as well as assisting the auction request submitted. Auction is an open and reliable and safety selling and buying system, and should always be done according to the applicable procedures. The auction aims to ensure the legal certainty transfer of rights its auction object. However, on the transfer of auction object rights in the case of the Supreme Court Verdict Number 481 K TUN 2016, although the auction has been conducted in accordance with applicable procedures, it has created legal uncertainty with the cancellation of its auction object by the State Administrative Court. This case may lead to distrust of the security and legal protection of the auction mechanism, thereby ultimately impeding the development of non execution voluntary auction in the society. Based on the aforementioned case, this thesis analizes the transfer process of the auction object rights through non execution voluntary auction by Class II Auctioneer to ensure legal protection for the buyer, and the responsibility of Class II Auctioneer on the cancellation of its auction object by the State Administrative Court. This thesis research uses normative juridical method with qualitative descriptive analytical approach. The research found that there is a mistake in The Indonesian National Land Agency who issued the auction object while there is a dispute on that object in the State Administrative Court. Finally, the writer suggests that the auctioneer and the auction participants, particularly buyers, always to apply the precision and prudent principle by researching and knowing in detail the state and legal status of the auction object before the auction is held. The writer also suggests the Government to create a new integrated system between The Indonesian National Land Agency and The Indonesian Judiciary Board on the verification, registration and right transfer of the land. Keywords Auctioneer, Non execution Voluntary Auction, Transfer of Right, Legal Protection For Auction Buyer "

"ABSTRAKTesis ini membahas kewenangan notaris dan kepastian hukum dari akta risalahlelang notaris. Pasal 15 ayat 2 huruf g UU Notaris menetapkan bahwa notarisberwenang membuat akta risalah lelang sementara Vendu Reglement (Peraturan Lelang) menyatakan bahwa kewenangan untuk menyusun suatu akta lelang dilakukan oleh pejabat lelang. Oleh karena itu, pokok permasalahan dari tesis ini adalah kewenangan hukum dari notaris dalam membuat akta risalah lelang berdasarkan Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris dan bagaimana kepastian hukum dari akta risalah lelang yang dibuat oleh notaris. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif dan dilengkapi dengan wawancara. Berdasarkan prinsip hukum lex specialis derogat legi generalis, penulis menyimpulkan bahwa notaris tidak secara otomatis berwenang untuk membuat akta risalah lelang. Hanya notaris yang ditunjuk sebagai pejabat lelang oleh pemerintah yang memiliki kewenangan untuk membuat akta risalah lelang. Oleh karena itu, akta risalah lelang yang dibuat oleh notaris yang tidak memenuhi syarat sebagai juru lelang akan membuat akta risalah lelang menjadi tidak otentik dan tidak memberikan kepastian hukum bagi para pihak

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis discussed the authority of a notary and the legal certainty of notary's auction deed. Article 15 paragraph 2 point g of the Notary Act stipulates that a public notary is authorized to draw up an auction deed while vendu reglement (the Auction Act) states that the authority to draw up an auction deed is held by an auctioneer. Therefore, the main issues of this thesis are the legal authority of notary in drawing up an auction deed based on the Notary Act and how the legal certainty of an auction deed drew up by a notary. The method used in this research is juridical normative and equipped by interviews. Based on the legal principle of lex specialis derogat legi generalis, the writer concluded that a notary is not automatically authorized to draw up an auction deed. Only a notary who is also appointed as an auctioneer by the government has the authority to draw up an auction deed. Therefore, an auction deed drew up by a notary who does not qualify as an auctioneer will make the deed not authentic and does not provide legal certainty for the parties."

"Klausula Eksonerasi adalah suatu klausula di dalam kontrak yang mengandung kondisi membatasi, atau bahkan menghapus sama sekali tanggung jawab yang semestinya dibebankan kepada salah satu pihak di dalam kontrak. Bagaimana pengaturan tentang klausula eksonerasi di dalam sistem hukum common law, BUrgerlijk Wetboek (BW), dan Undang-Undang Nomor 8 tabula 1999 tentang Perlindungan Konsumen (UUPK); bagaimana kedudukan klausula eksonerasi dalam Risalah lelang Eksekusi ditinjau dari asas dan prinsip perlindungan konsumen secara umum, melalui BW, dan UUPK; bagaimana kemungkinan untuk tidak dimasukannya klausula eksonerasi di dalam Risalah Lelang Eksekusi di masa depan adalah merupakan masalah yang diteliti dalam tesis ini.Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam tesis ini adalah yuridis normatif, dengan data sekunder, yang setelah diperoleh kemudian dianalisis secara kualitatif. Penelitian ini bersifat deskriptif dan dari bentuknya adalah penelitian preskriptif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan perbandingan.Berdasarkan basil analisis ditemukan bahwa sistem hukum common law menyikapi klausula eksonerasi dari dua pendekatan yaitu pendekatan pengadilan dan pendekatan perundang-undangan, BW dalam Pasal 1320, Pasal 1338, Pasal 1493, Pasal 1506 dan Pasal 1512 mengijinkan dipergunakannya klausula eksonerasi. UUPK melalui Pasal 18 ayat (1) melarang penggunaannya. Jika ditinjau dari asas dan prinsip perlindungan konsumen secara umum maka klausula eksonerasi merupakan suatu pelanggaran, namun BW mengijinkan hal ini melalui Pasal 1506 dan 1512, Jika ditelaah melalui UUPK maka Pasal 18 ayat (1) tidak dapat dikenakan untuk Risalah Lelang Eksekusi karena pihak penjualnya bukanlah Pelaku Usaha sebagaimana diatur oleh Pasal tersebut. Karakteristik Lelang Eksekusi masih sangat memerlukan dicantumkannya klausula eksonerasi di dalam Risalah Lelangnya sehingga kiranya di masa depan klausula tersebut masih perlu dipertahankan hanya pemakaiannya harus disesuaikan dengan asas dan prinsip perlindungan konsumen."

"[Tesis ini membahas mengenai hubungan hukum antara Balai Lelang dan Pejabat Lelang Kelas II baik berdasarkan Peraturan Menteri Keuangan yang terbit Tahun 2005 yaitu Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Nomor 118/PMK.07/2005 tentang Balai Lelang dan Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Nomor 119/PMK.07/2005 tentang Pejabat Lelang Kelas II maupun berdasarkan Peraturan Menteri Keuangan yang terbit Tahun 2010 yaitu Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Nomor 176/PMK.06/2010tentang Balai lelang dan Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Nomor 175/PMK.06/2010 tentang Pejabat Lelang Kelas II. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian Yuridis Normatif, dengan metode analisis data kualitatif, serta tipologi penelitian eksplanatoris sehingga bentuk hasil penelitian adalah ekplanatoris-analitis. Permasalahan yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah bahwa berdasarkan Peraturan Menteri Keuangan yang terbit Tahun 2005 maka Balai Lelang dalam menyelenggarakanJasa Pelaksanaan Lelang wajib mengadakan perikatan perdata dengan Pejabat Lelang Kelas II mengenai pelaksanaan lelang dan honorarium Pejabat Lelang Kelas II. Namun kemudian ketentuan tersebut diubah dengan dikeluarkannya Peraturan Menteri Keuangan yang terbit Tahun 2010 di mana didalamnya diatur Balai Lelang selaku pemohon atau kuasa pemilik barang dapat mengadakan perjanjian perdata dengan Pejabat Lelang Kelas II mengenai pelaksanaan lelang dan imbalan jasa Pejabat Lelang Kelas II. Sejak diterbitkannya Peraturan MenteriKeuangan Tahun 2010 banyak keluhan yang muncul terutama dari pihak Balai Lelang dikarenakan Balai Lelang tentunya merasa lahan pekerjaannya jadi mengecil jika dibandingkan dengan ketentuan sebelumnya. Hasil penelitian kemudian menyimpulkan belum adanya harmonisasi yang baik antara Balai Lelang dengan Pejabat Lelang Kelas II. Tesis ini juga membahas hubungan hukum yang tepat yang dapat mengharmonisasikan hubungan Balai Lelang dengan Pejabat Lelang Kelas II.; This thesis discusses the legal relationship between the Auction House and the Second Class Auctioneer under the Minister Of Finance Regulations, published in 2005, namely Minister of Finance Regulation No. 118/PMK.07/2005 on Auction House and Minister of Finance Regulation No. 119/PMK.07/2005 on Second Class Auctioneer and based on the Regulation of the Minister of Finance, published in 2010, namely Minister of Finance Regulations No. 176/PMK.06/2010 on Action House and the Minister of Finance Regulation No. 175/PMK.06/2010 on Second Class Auctioneer. This research is a normative juridical research, with qualitative data analysis methods, as well as the typology of explanatory research that the forms results is a analytical ekplanatory research. Issues raised in this study is that based on the Regulation of the Minister of Finance, published in 2005, the Auctioneer in organizing Implementation Services Auctions shall hold a civil engagement with Second Class Auction Officer regarding the auction and honorarium Second Class Auction Officer. But thensuch provision amended by the enactment of the Finance Minister, published in 2010, where in regulated Auctioneer as the applicant or owner of the goods can hold power civil agreement with Second Class Auction Officer regarding the auction and auction fee of Second Class Auction Officer. Since the enactment of the Finance Minister in 2010 many complaints that arise mainly from the Party of Auction House, it because they certainly find their land of work be smaller when compared to the previous provisions. Results of the research concluded that there is a lack of harmonization between the Auction House and the Second Class Auction Officer. This thesis also discusses the precise legal relationship which can harmonize relations between the Auction House and the Second Class Auction Officer., This thesis discusses the legal relationship between the Auction House andthe Second Class Auctioneer under the Minister Of Finance Regulations,published in 2005, namely Minister of Finance Regulation No. 118/PMK.07/2005on Auction House and Minister of Finance Regulation No. 119/PMK.07/2005 onSecond Class Auctioneer and based on the Regulation of the Minister of Finance,published in 2010, namely Minister of Finance Regulations No.176/PMK.06/2010 on Action House and the Minister of Finance Regulation No.175/PMK.06/2010 on Second Class Auctioneer. This research is a normativejuridical research, with qualitative data analysis methods, as well as the typologyof explanatory research that the forms results is a analytical ekplanatory research.Issues raised in this study is that based on the Regulation of the Minister ofFinance, published in 2005, the Auctioneer in organizing Implementation ServicesAuctions shall hold a civil engagement with Second Class Auction Officerregarding the auction and honorarium Second Class Auction Officer. But thensuch provision amended by the enactment of the Finance Minister, published in2010, where in regulated Auctioneer as the applicant or owner of the goods canhold power civil agreement with Second Class Auction Officer regarding theauction and auction fee of Second Class Auction Officer. Since the enactment ofthe Finance Minister in 2010 many complaints that arise mainly from the Party ofAuction House, it because they certainly find their land of work be smaller whencompared to the previous provisions. Results of the research concluded that thereis a lack of harmonization between the Auction House and the Second ClassAuction Officer. This thesis also discusses the precise legal relationship whichcan harmonize relations between the Auction House and the Second ClassAuction Officer.]"

"Tulisan ini membahas tentang Penyelenggaraaan Lelang Eksekusi Pengadilan oleh Kantor Pelayanan Kekayaan Negara dan Lelang Sebagai Pelayanan Publik. Untuk memahami cara Penyelenggaraan Lelang Eksekusi Pengadilan, definisi, penyelenggara, dan asas asas dalam pelayanan publik serta pengertian sumber hukum dan asas asas dalam lelang juga dibahas. Tulisan ini ditulis dengan menggunakan metode penulisan hukum normatif untuk menghasilkan data deskriptif analitis. Selanjutnya, temuan penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa, Penyelenggaraan lelang eksekusi pengadilan sebagai pelayanan publik haruslah sesuai dengan ketentuan yang berlaku termasuk dalam proses pra lelang, saat lelang, dan pasca lelang, serta dokumen persyaratan yang dibutuhkan dalam proses tersebut. Penelitian ini diharapkan mampu menjelaskan lebih lanjut mengenai penyelenggaraan lelang eksekusi pengadilan dan penerapan asas akuntabilitas sebagai bentuk pelayanan publik.

---

This paper discusses the Implementation of the Court Execution Auction by State Property Service Office and Auction as Public Service. In order to understand the way in which Court Execution Auctions are held, definitions, organizers, and principles in public services as well as understanding legal sources and principles in auctions are also discussed. This paper was written using the normative legal writing method to produce analytical descriptive data. Furthermore, the findings of this study conclude that, The implementation of court execution auctions as a public service must be in accordance with applicable regulations including in the pre- auction process, during the auction, and after the auction, as well as the required documents in the process. This research is expected to explain regarding the implementation of court execution auctions and the application of the principle of accountability as a form of public services."

"ABSTRAKTesis ini membahas pelaksanaan lelang noneksekusi sukarela terhadap aset Perseroan Terbatas yang dilakukan oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas II Tangerang. Lelang Noneksekusi sukarela yang dilakukan oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas II seharusnya tidak menyisakan permasalahan di kemudian hari. Selain itu, Lelang seharusnya aman karena dilakukan secara apa adanya (as is) dan Pembeli dianggap sudah mengetahui kondisi objek yang dilelang. Namun demikian, lelang tersebut digugat oleh pihak lain karena objek lelang ternyata juga merupakan objek sita jaminan/eksekusi pada perkara lain yang telah berkekuatan hukum tetap, antara pemilik objek lelang dengan penggugat. Berdasarkan uraian tersebut, Tesis ini meneliti pelaksanaan lelang oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas II atas harta milik Perseroan Terbatas dengan permasalahan mengenai prosedur pelaksanaan lelang dan keabsahan lelang. Penelitian menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif bersifat deskriptif analitis, dengan pendekatan kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Lelang dapat terlaksana secara sukarela karena dokumen persyaratan lelang sudah lengkap dan telah memenuhi legalitas formal subjek dan objek lelang. Informasi mengenai adanya sita jaminan/eksekusi tidak terdapat pada Surat Keterangan Pendaftaran Tanah yang diterbitkan oleh Badan Pertanahan dalam rangka penyelenggaraan lelang. Informasi tersebut penting dalam menentukan siapa yang berwenang melakukan lelang. Pada penelitian ditemukan perbedaan informasi yang tertera dalam Surat Keterangan Pendaftaran Tanah dan bukti kepemilikan hak atas tanah. Perbedaan tersebut dapat mengakibatkan kesalahan kewenangan dalam melakukan lelang. Lelang yang seharusnya dilakukan oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas I dilakukan oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas II. Penulis menyimpulkan bahwa pelaksanaan lelang terhadap aset Perseroan Terbatas memiliki prosedur yang sama dengan lelang perseorangan. Kekeliruan kewenangan Pejabat Lelang mengakibatkan lelang menjadi tidak sah. Penulis menyarankan bahwa dalam pelaksanaan lelang noneksekusi sukarela, Pejabat Lelang Kelas II dapat melakukan pemeriksaan lebih jauh atas objek lelang.

---

ABSTRACT This thesis will describe the implementation on the voluntarily non-execution auction of the assets owned by an Indonesian limited liability company. The voluntary auction lead by Class II Auctioneer (Pejabat Lelang Kelas II) was supposed to be conducted voluntarily without dispute and does not leave any future dispute. Considering that the auction conducted "as is", the buyer was expected to realize the condition of the object. In fact, the auction was sued by another party who argues that the object is a confiscation object on another dispute. The information which indicates that the auction object is an object of confiscation does not declared in the Land Registration Letter issued by Land Office. n an auction with fixed assets as objects, the issuance of Land Registration Letter is required to fulfill formal legality of auction object. Land Registration Letter is also a document that became basis in determining who is authorized to conduct the auction. The research found differences between information contained in the Land Registration Letter and information in the Right to Build Certificate. Such discrepancies may result errors in determining auction officers, and it may caused to invalidity of the auction. The research conducted by normative juridical with analytical descriptive method will describe general auction procedure with emphasize on the Limited Liability Company as the owner of auction object."