Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Perbuatan notaris menyerahkan sertipikat hak milik pengurusan balik nama yang dimohonkan oleh bukan pemegang hak merupakan perbuatan melawan hukum. Notaris seharusnya berperan dalam membantu menciptakan sebuah kepastian dan perlindungan hukum kepada masyarakat yang bersifat preventif. Notaris dapat mencegah terhindar dari adanya hukuman apabila dalam melaksanakan pekerjaannya tidak melanggar larangan serta sanksi yang ada pada UUJN. Permasalahan yang diangkat adalah mengenai kewenangan notaris menyerahkan sertipikat hak milik pengurusan balik nama yang dimohonkan oleh bukan pemegang hak dalam putusan pengadilan negeri nomor  25/pdt.g/2018/Pn.Krg. Penelitian ini berbentuk analisis yuridis normatif, penelitian yang dilakukan berfokus pada norma-norma hukum positif yang berdasarkan bahan sekunder. Tipologi penelitian bersifat eksplanatoris yang bertujuan untuk mengidentifikasi fenomena akibat dari perbuatan tersebut. Hasil penelitian yang diperoleh yakni tindakan notaris yang tidak mengembalikan sertipikat pada pemiliknya merupakan perbuatan melanggar hukum. Notaris harus lebih memperhatikan dalam menerima sertipikat yang diserahkan oleh bukan pemegang hak, agar langkah selanjutnya notaris dapat meminta surat kuasa tertulis, atapun dengan surat kuasa tidak tertulis dan dihadiri oleh pemegang hak serta pihak ketiga. Tindakan notaris menerima sertipikat  hak milik pengurusan balik nama yang dimohonkan oleh bukan pemegang hak seharusnya melaksanakan penolakan dan diberikan pemberian edukasi kepada para penghadap. Notaris dalam melaksanakan kewenangannya perlu selalu mengacu pada aspek nilai kehati-hatian agar terhindar dari kesalahan dan pelanggaran hukum. Tanggung jawab notaris yang menyerahkan sertipikat hak milik pengurusan balik nama yang dimohonkan oleh bukan pemegang hak ada 3 (tiga). Secara pidana yaitu penggelapan pada jabatan, secara perdata adalah perbuatan melawan hukum dan pertanggung jawaban administrasi.

---

The act of a notary handing over a certificate of ownership of the transfer of title requested by a non-right holder is an unlawful act. Notaries should play a role in helping to create a preventive legal certainty and protection for the public. Notaries can avoid being punished if in carrying out their work they do not violate the prohibitions and sanctions contained in UUJN. The issue raised is regarding the authority of a notary to hand over a certificate of ownership rights to transfer the title filed by a non-right holder in a district court decision number 25/pdt.g/2018/Pn.Krg. This research is in the form of normative juridical analysis, the research conducted focuses on positive legal norms based on secondary materials. The research typology is explanatory in nature which aims to identify the phenomena resulting from these actions. The research results obtained are that the action of a notary who does not return the certificate to the owner is an unlawful act. The notary must pay more attention to receiving certificates submitted by non-right holders, so that the next step is that the notary may request a written power of attorney, or with an unwritten power of attorney and be attended by the right holder and a third party. requested by non-right holders should carry out the refusal and provide education to the appearers. Notaries in exercising their authority need to always refer to the aspect of prudential values ​​in order to avoid mistakes and violations of the law. There are 3 (three) responsibilities of a notary who submits a certificate of ownership of the transfer of title requested by a non-rights holder. Criminally, namely embezzlement in office, civilly it is an act against the law and administrative responsibility."

"ABSTRAK Sebuah tanggung jawab diperlukan dalam setiap pekerjaan termasuk pada profesi Jabatan Notaris dengan demikian akan menunjukan sikap yang profesional dan mengurangi notaris dalam pelanggaran kode etik. Hal seperti ini akan menumbuhkan kepercayaan yang tinggi terhadap Notaris. Seorang Notaris dalam kode etiknya diatur bahwa dalam menjalankan tugas jabatannya harus menyadari kewajibannya, bekerja mandiri, jujur, tidak berpihak dan dengan penuh rasa tanggung jawab. Dalam menjalankan tugasnya wajib bertanggung jawab artinya, kesediaan dengan melakukan sebaik mungkin tugas apa saja yang termaksud lingkup profesinya, bertindak secara proposional, tanpa membedakan perkara bayaran dan perkara cuma-cuma, dan kesediaan memberikan laporan pertanggungjawaban atau pelaksaan kewajibannya. Pada putusan Majelis Pengawas Pusat Notaris No. 11/B/MPPN/XII/2017, adapun masalah yang diteliti adalah pertanggung jawaban Notaris dalam memberikan bantuan terhadap masyarakat yangmembutuhkan jasanya. Adapun pihak dalam kasus tersebut adalah Franciscus yang menitipkan sertipikat hak milik no. 1743/Pinang atas nama H. Abdullah kepada Notaris Bambang Suwondo untuk dilakukan proses balik nama dari H. Abdullah menjadi Wen Chie Siang. Segera setelah diberikannya sertipikat tersebut Notaris tersebut tidak melakukan proses balik nama bahkan sertipikat tersebut sampai hilang. Sebenarnya Notaris bertanggung jawab atas hilangya sertipikat tersebut, meskipun pekerjaan balik nama bukan menjadi kewenangan seorang Notaris namun Notaris yang bersangkutan adalahNotaris/PPAT, sehingga itu adalah konsekuensi berdasarkan kepercayaan dari para pihak setelah melakukan AJB.

---

ABSTRACT

A responsibility is required in every job, including in the profession of Notary Position and thus will show a professional attitude and reduce the notary in violating the code of ethics. Things like this will foster high trust in the Notary. A Notary in his code of ethics is regulated that in carrying out his duties, he must be aware of his obligations, work independently, be honest, impartial and with full responsibility. In carrying out its duties, it is obligatory to be responsible, that is, willingness to do as well as possible the tasks of the scope of the profession, to act proportionally, without differentiating payment cases and free cases, and willingness to provide accountability reports or carrying out their obligations. On the decision of MajelisPengawasPusatNotaris No. 11 / B / MPPN / XII / 2017, while the problem under study is the responsibility of the Notary in providing assistance to the people who need their services. In the case was FP who entrusted his freehold tittle no. 1743 / Pinang in the name of HA to Notary BS for transfer of ownership from HA to WCS. Immediately after the certificate was issued, the Notary did not process the transfer of ownership and even the certificate was lost. Actually the Notary is responsible for the loss of the certificate, even though the transfer of ownership is not the authority of a Notary, but Notary in the case is a Notary / Land Deed Official (PPAT), so that it is a consequence based on the trust of the parties after carrying out the AJB.

 

"

"Peralihan hak atas tanah dapat dilakukan dengan berbagai cara, antara lain yaitu jual beli. Jual beli atas tanah merupakaan proses peralihan hak tanah antara penjual dan pembeli. Masing-masing pihak memiliki hak dan kewajiban yang harus dipenuhi. Namun, dalam jual beli tersebut pada beberapa kasus, salah satu pihak tidak melaksanakan kewajibannya sehingga merugikan pihak lain. Hal ini sebagaimana terjadi dalam kasus yang dikaji dalam penelitian ini yaitu penjual yang merupakan ahli waris menghalang- halangi proses balik nama sertipikat tanah penjual kepada pembeli, sehingga permasalahan yang dikaji adalah implikasi hukum balik nama sertipikat tanah hasil jual beli yang prosesnya dihalangi oleh ahli waris berdasarkan Putusan MA No. 565 K/PDT/2020 dan Tanggung Jawab Notaris dan PPAT dalam pembuatan Akta Jual Beli dan Surat Keterangan Waris Ganda yang ditetapkan Pengadilan. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah penelitian doktrinal, dengan tipe penelitian eksplanatoris yang menggunakan data sekunder. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa pertama,  implikasi hukum proses balik nama adalah Para Tergugat harus menaati putusan MA untuk memenuhi seluruh proses balik nama yang diperlukan agar Penggugat memperoleh haknya secara utuh, mendapatkan hak atas azas publistas, azas ekonomis, dan fungsi umum objek tanah tersebut. Kedua, Notaris seharusnya memberikan penyuluhan hukum bukan justru melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum karena secara sadar Notaris tersebut telah membuat dua surat keterangan waris dengan pihak yang sama dan dengan keperluan yang sama pula. Dalam hal ini notaris bersama dengan para tergugat terbukti telah bersama-sama dengan tergugat merekayasa surat keterangan waris kedua tersebut dan menghilangkan salah satu ahli waris yang mana perbuatan tersebut merupakan kejahatan.

---

The transfer of land rights can be carried out through various means, one of which is by sale and purchase. Sale and purchase of land involve the transfer of land rights between the seller and the buyer, each party having rights and obligations to fulfill. However, in some cases, one party fails to fulfill their obligations, thereby causing harm to the other party. This situation is evident in the case studied here, where the seller, who is an heir, obstructed the process of transferring the land certificate to the buyer. Thus, the legal implications of transferring the land certificate resulting from the sale and purchase process being obstructed by heirs are examined based on Supreme Court Decision No. 565 K/PDT/2020. Additionally, the responsibilities of the Notary and the Land Deed Official (PPAT) in the creation of the Sale and Purchase Deed and the duplicate Inheritance Certificate, as determined by the court, are explored. The research methodology employed is doctrinal research, utilizing an explanatory type with secondary data. The findings indicate that first, the legal implications of the transfer process require the defendants to comply with the Supreme Court decision to complete all necessary procedures for transferring the certificate, ensuring the plaintiff's full rights to the land based on principles of publicity, economic principles, and the land's general function. Second, the Notary should provide legal counseling instead of engaging in unlawful actions, as evidenced by knowingly issuing two inheritance certificates to the same party for the same purpose. In this case, the Notary, along with the defendants, was found to have colluded in engineering the second inheritance certificate and omitting one of the heirs, constituting a criminal act."

"Dalam menjalankan jabatan sebagai seorang Notaris dan juga Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah (PPAT), seorang Notaris/PPAT dituntut untuk selalu memperhatikan batasan-batasan dalam melaksanakan jabatannya. Profesionalitas dalam melaksanakan jabatan harus sama-sama dijunjung oleh Notaris/PPAT tetap sama dengan mematuhi koridor-koridor yang telah diatur. Dalam hal melaksanakan tugasnya Notaris/PPAT bisa saja tidak terlepas dari melakukan pelanggaran kode etik contohnya berupa pelanggaran kode etik berupa kelalaian dalam penyelesaian akta dalam proses balik nama. Pada putusan Majelis Pengawas Wilayah Notaris Nomor 14/PTS/Mj.PWN.Prov.DKIJakarta/XII/2018, adapun masalah yang diteliti adalah tanggung jawab PPAT atas kelalaian proses balik nama sertipikat pada kantor pertanahan terkait perilaku dalam jabatannya selaku Notaris dan kompetensi serta peran Majelis Pengawas Daerah (MPD) dan Majelis Pengawas Wilayah (MPW) dalam kasus ini. MPD dan MPW berkompetensi dalam memeriksa dan memberi sanksi dalam kasus ini karena terkait dengan perilaku Notaris dalam menjalankan jabatan lain sebagai PPAT. Seharusnya pada saat kasus ini terjadi, yang lebih tepat untuk memeriksa dan memberi sanksi kepada Notaris/PPAT tersebut adalah Majelis Kehormatan Notaris. Saat ini Ikatan Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah sudah memiliki alat perlengkapan organisasi yang bertujuan untuk melakukan fungsi pembinaan dan pengawasan yaitu Majelis Pembina dan Pengawas PPAT (MPPP) guna membantu Menteri melakukan pembinaan dan pengawasan. Dengan demikian diharapkan keberadaan MPPP beserta dengan MPN dapat berjalan secara beriringan dalam melakukan pembinaan dan pengawasan terhadap PPAT yang juga merangkap jabatan sebagai Notaris.

---

In carrying out his position as a Notary and also a Land Deed Making Officer (PPAT), a Notary/PPAT is required to always pay attention to the limitations in carrying out his position. Professionalism in carrying out the position must be equally upheld by the Notary/PPAT remain the same by complying with the corridors that have been regulated. In terms of carrying out their duties, the Notary/PPAT may not be separated from violating the code of ethics, for example in the form of a violation of the code of ethics in the form of negligence in completing the deed in the transfer of name process. In the decision of the Notary Regional Supervisory Council Number 14/PTS/Mj.PWN.Prov.DKIJakarta/XII/2018, the problem being studied is PPAT's responsibility for the negligence of the certificate transfer process at the land office related to behavior in his position as a notary and his competence and role. Regional Supervisory Council (MPD) and Regional Supervisory Council (MPW) in this case. MPD and MPW are competent in examining and imposing sanctions in this case because it is related to the behavior of a Notary in carrying out other positions as PPAT. At the time this case occurred, it was more appropriate to examine and sanction the Notary/PPAT it was the Notary Honorary Council. Currently, the Association of Land Deed Maker Officials already has organizational equipment that aims to carry out the function of guidance and supervision, namely the PPAT Guidance and Supervisory Council (MPPP) to assist the Minister in conducting guidance and supervision. In this way, it is hoped that the existence of MPPP along with MPN must go hand in hand in conducting guidance and supervision of PPAT who also serves as a Notary."

"ABSTRAKDalam Praktik Kenotariatan, covernote lebih dikenal dengan istilah surat keterangan, surat ini digunakan untuk menerangkan atau menyatakan bahwa suatu akta sedang dalam proses pengurusan di kantor notaris yang bersangkutan. Tidak ada pengaturan mengenai covernote dalam Undang-undang Jabatan Notaris No.30 tahun 2004 padahal Surat keterangan merupakan salah satu produk dari Notaris sehingga dapat dikatakan produk covernote ini bukan wewenang Notaris namun tidak dilarang untuk dibuat oleh notaris. Dalam dunia perbankan, covernote hanya berfungsi sebagai jembatan antara pihak kreditur selaku bank dengan debitur yang membutuhkan kredit, supaya debitur tidak menunggu terlalu lama sampai semua sertipikat selesai maka dibuatlah covernote oleh notaris yang bersangkutan sebagai pegangan untuk bank dalam mencairkan kredit. Permasalahan dapat timbul apabila pada saat kredit sudah dicairkan kepada debitor dan ternyata agunan tidak diterima oleh kreditor, dalam tesis ini akan dibahas mengenai kekuatan hukum covernote dan tanggung jawab notaris terhadap pihak yang dirugikan akibatnya, metode penelitian adalah penelitian normatif yang bersifat yuridis normatif, tipologi yang dipakai adalah eksplanatoris dan preskriptif, jenis data yang dipakai adalah data sekunder dengan teknik analisis data dan pengambilan kesimpulan induktif (khusus-umum). Covernote dalam hal ini bukanlah akta otentik melainkan hanya surat yang menerangkan apa yang sedang diproses di kantor notaris bersangkutan, sehingga pada dasarnya covernote tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum yang mengikat antara debitur dengan kreditur.Karena covernote tidak diatur dalam Undang-undang Jabatan Notaris (UUJN), maka akibat yang ditimbulkan oleh adanya covernote berlaku ketentuan hukum umum, baik secara perdata maupun pidana. Oleh karenanya bentukpertanggungjawaban yang dapat dituntut kepada Notaris akibat dari kegagalan covernote yang disebabkan oleh adanya kesalahan atau kelalaian Notaris, adalah pertanggungjawaban perdata berdasarkan perbuatan melawan hukum atau berdasarkan wanprestasi. Pertanggung jawaban pidana hanya dapat dituntut kepada Notaris apabila adanya tindakan hukum dari Notaris yang secara sengaja dengan penuh kesadaran serta direncanakan oleh Notaris bersama debitor bahwa covernote yang diterbitkan tersebut untuk dijadikan suatu alat melakukan, turut serta melakukan atau membantu melakukan suatu kebohongan/memberikan keterangan yang tidak benar yang dapat merugikan pihak bank.

---

ABSTRACTIn practice, covernote is better known as a reference letter/certificate, this letter is used as an explanation/statement that a deed still undergoes the legal process. There is no regulation that explicitly regulates covernote in the Notary Act 30 of 2004, despite the fact that a covernote is considered as one of notarial products.Therefore, it can be stated that Notary has no authority to produce covernote, yet such letter is not prohibited to be produced by Notary. In the banking world, covernote only serves as a bridge between creditors as the bank and debtors in need of credits, so it is not necessary for the borrowers (debtors) to wait too long for all certificates to be finished; instead covernote can be produced by the notary as a guarantee for the bank to disburse the credit. Problems can arise if at the time the credit was disbursed to debtors and collateral apparently not accepted by thecreditors, in this thesis will be discussed on legal powers and responsibilities of notaries covernote to the injured party as a result, the method of research is normative research with juridical normative characteristic, typology explanatory and prescriptive is used, the type of data used is secondary data with data analysis techniques and inductive inference making (special-general).Covernote in this case is not an authentic document but only a letter explaining what is still being processed at the notary's office, thus covernote does not have legal force which binds between a debtor and a creditor. Due to the fact that covernote is not regulated in Notary Law (UUJN), the consequence caused by the presence of covernote is the applicability of provisions of the general law, either in the context of civil or criminal law. As a result, a form of liability that can be charged to the Notary a result of the failure or negligence caused by Notary in producing the covernote, is a civil liability based on tort or breach of contract. Criminal liability may only be prosecuted/charged to the Notary if it is proven that the Notary hascommitted an intentionally action and with a full awareness has jointly planned with the debtor to issue the covernote as a tool to conduct, participate, perform or assist in providing false information which could be detrimental to the bank."

"Kasus tanah sengketa seringkali terjadi di Indonesia, permasalahan tersebut timbul akibat adanya perselisihan antar indvidu dengan individu, individu dengan kelompok maupun kelompok dengan kelompok. Permasalahan tanah sengketa yang sering kali terjadi di Indonesia hingga membutuhkan penyelesaian melalui jalur pengadilan adalah permasalahan tumpang tindih hak kepemilikan atas tanah. Hal ini sering tejadi karna adanya kesalahan pada penerbitan sertipikat hak atas tanah yang diterbitkan oleh pegawai/pejabat BPN, salah satu contoh kasusnya terdapat dalam Putusan Tata Usaha Negara, yang terjadi di Kelurahan BML, Kecamatan X Selatan, Kota X. Pada kasus ini, penulis menganalisis bagaimana tanggung jawab yang diberikan oleh Kantor Pertanahan Kota X dalam menjalakan fungsi dan tugasnya memberikan perlindungan hukum bagi pemegang hak dengan sertipikat sementara berdasarkan Putusan Tata Usaha Negara. Metode yang digunakan pada penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif dengan tipologi preskriptif dan jenis data sekunder. Dari hasil analisis terhadap putusan tersebut, dapat diketahui bahwa pendaftaran tanah yang dilaksanakan oleh Kantor Pertanahan dilakukan dengan tidak teliti dan cermat. Pada data yang ada dapat diketahui Kantor Pertanahan telah menerbitkan SHM Nomor 49, Kampung BM pada tahun 1963, sertipikat tersebut dikeluarkan dengan buku tanahnya saja. Kemudian kantor pertanahan terus menerus menerbitkan SHM di atas bidang tanah yang sama dengan nama berbeda tanpa membatalkan SHM No. 49/Kampung BM. Sehingga menimbulkan permasalahan tumpang tindih hak atas tanah. Simpulan penelitan adalah kantor pertanahan tidak melakukan tanggung jawabnya untuk melakukan pembatalan pada sertipikat hak yang tumpang tindih. Sertipikat sementera tersebut tidak mendapatkan perlindungan sebagaimana mestinya.

---

.Land dispute cases often happen in Indonesia, these problems arise due to the strife between individuals, individual with group and group with group. Land dispute problems that often occur in Indonesia and require settlements through the courts are the overlapping land ownership rights. These often happen because of the errors found in the issuance of land rights certificates issued by BPN employees/officials, an example of this case is in State Administrative Decisions, which occurred in BML Village, South P District, P City. In this case, the writer analyze how is the liability given by the P City Land Office in carrying out their functions and duties and legal protection for rights holders with temporary certificates based on State Administrative Decision. This research uses normative juridical method with prescriptive typology and secondary data types. From the results of the analysis on the decision, it is known that the land registration carried out by the Land Office was carried out with carelessness and scrutiny. Based on the available data that can be seen in the Land Office issue SHM Number 49, Kampung BM in 1963, the certificate was issued only with the land book. Then the land office continuously issuing the SHM on the same plot of land with a different name without canceling the SHM No. 49/Kampung BM. This creates the problem of overlapping land rights. The conclusion of the research is that the land office does not cancels 9 disputed objects that have been issued as a form of liability. And protection for land rights holders with temporary certificates has not been gotten the protection as it should have. "

"Notaris semestinya membuat akta autentik untuk semua perbuatan dan perjanjian yang diminta oleh pihak yang berkepentingan sepanjang syarat subjektif dan objektif dari perjanjian sebagaimana yang ditentukan dalam Pasal 1320 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata dipenuhi. Namun dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 2853K/Pdt/2019 ditemukan bahwa notaris menunda bahkan menolak pembuatan akta dengan mengembalikan uang muka pembayaran pembuatan akta. Untuk itu penelitian ini dilakukan dengan mengangkat permasalahan terkait tanggung jawab notaris terhadap penundaan pembuatan akta yang dilakukan dan upaya hukum yang seharusnya dilakukan pembeli untuk mendapatkan kepastian hukum. Penelitian hukum doktrinal ini, mengkaji objek hukum dalam konsepnya sebagai peraturan perundang-undangan dan putusan pengadilan. Objek hukum yang diteliti tersebut dikumpulkan melalui studi dokumen dalam bentuk bahan-bahan hukum, baik primer dan sekunder, yang selanjutnya dianalisis untuk menjawab permasalahan penelitian. Berdasarkan hasil analisis yang dilakukan maka dapat dijelaskan sebagai berikut: Pertama, notaris tidak dapat dikatakan sebagai pihak yang melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum karena penundaan pembuatan akta didasarkan pada tidak adanya bukti peralihan hak yang sah dan juga tidak adanya izin persetujuan dari Direksi Perusahaan Daerah Pasar Jaya. Kedua, pihak yang dirugikan dapat mengajukan gugatan kepada penjual karena meskipun penjual bukanlah pihak yang berwenang melakukan perbuatan hukum, penjual tetap melakukannya

---

Notaries should make authentic deeds for all actions and agreements requested by interested parties as long as the subjective and objective conditions of the agreement as stipulated in Article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code are met. However, in the Supreme Court Decision Number 2853K/Pdt/2019 it was found that the notary delayed and even refused to make the deed by returning the down payment for making the deed. For this reason, this research was carried out by raising issues related to the notary's responsibility for the delay in making the deed and the legal remedies that the buyer should have taken to obtain legal certainty. This doctrinal legal research examines legal objects in their concept as statutory regulations and court decisions. The legal objects studied were collected through document studies in the form of legal materials, both primary and secondary, which were then analyzed to answer research problems. Based on the results of the analysis carried out, it can be explained as follows: First, the notary cannot be said to be a party who committed an unlawful act because the delay in making the deed was based on the absence of evidence of legal transfer of rights and also the absence of approval from the Directors of the Pasar Jaya Regional Company. Second, the aggrieved party can file a lawsuit against the seller because even though the seller is not the party authorized to take legal action, the seller still does it. "

"[ABSTRAKPropinsi Bali merupakan wilayah Indonesia yang jumlah wisatawan yang datangke kian mengingkat setiap tahunnya. Hal ini menyebabkan banyak orang baik warganegara Indonesia dan orang asing tertarik untuk tinggal atau membuka usaha di Bali.Undang-Undang Pokok Agraria menyatakan bahwa hanya warga negara Indonesia yangberhak untuk memiliki tanah. Sementara itu, orang asing diberi hak untuk menempatilahan di Indonesia dengan hak pakai dan hak sewa atas bangunan. Tetapi padakenyataannya banyak orang asing menggunakan perjanjian pinjam nama untukmenempati lahan di Bali dalam jangka waktu yang mereka inginkan. Perjanjian sewamenyewa digunakan sebagai upaya untuk menutupi keberadaan perjanjian dapat dianggapsebagai perjanjian pinjam nama sehingga perjanjian sewa menyewa merupakan suatuupaya penyelundupan hukum. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif,untuk memperoleh data yang dikehendaki penelitian ini dengan melakukan telaah bahanpustaka atau data sekunder. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa rangkaian perjanjianpinjam nama antara lain surat pernyataan, perjanjian sewa menyewa, surat kuasamengelola, surat kuasa menjual dan perjanjian perpanjangan sewa. Pada saat orang asingdatang kepada notaris untuk dibuatkan akta otentik sebaiknya notaris lebih teliti danseksama sehingga apabila terdapat indikasi pembuatan akta otentik dapat menyalahiaturan hukum maka notaris dapat memberi penyuluhan hukum. Dalam menjalankannyajabatannya seorang notaris itu harus bertindak amanah, jujur dan seksama karena notariswajib menjaga kepercayaan masyarakat dan negara dengan baik.

---

ABSTRACTBali Province is a major area of Indonesia tourism so that the number of touristswho come to Bali is increasingly every year. This leads to a lot of people both Indonesiancitizens and foreigners keen to stay or open a business in Bali. Basic Agrarian Law statesthat only Indonesian citizens who have the right to own land. Meanwhile, foreigners weregiven the right to occupy land in Indonesia with the right to use and leases on buildings.But in fact many foreigners use nominee agreement and loan agreement to occupy land inBali in the time period they want. The content of Indonesian citizen who appointed to bea nominee states that the true owner of the land is the foreigner because the money sheused for the purchase of land was belongs to the foreigner. Lease agreement is used as anattempt to cover up the existence of the agreement can be considered as a loan agreementso that the name of the lease agreement is a legal smuggling attempt. This study usesnormative juridical, to obtain the desired data of this study by conducting research librarymaterials or secondary data. The analysis showed that a series of loan agreements includea statement of the name, lease agreement, power of attorney to manage, power of attorneyto sell and lease extension agreement. By the time a foreigner came to the notary for thenotary should be made authentic act more carefully and thoroughly so that if there areindications of an authentic deed may violate the rule of law, the notary can provide legalcounseling. A notary should act trustworthy, honest and thorough, as notaries are requiredto maintain public confidence and the country well.;Bali Province is a major area of Indonesia tourism so that the number of touristswho come to Bali is increasingly every year. This leads to a lot of people both Indonesiancitizens and foreigners keen to stay or open a business in Bali. Basic Agrarian Law statesthat only Indonesian citizens who have the right to own land. Meanwhile, foreigners weregiven the right to occupy land in Indonesia with the right to use and leases on buildings.But in fact many foreigners use nominee agreement and loan agreement to occupy land inBali in the time period they want. The content of Indonesian citizen who appointed to bea nominee states that the true owner of the land is the foreigner because the money sheused for the purchase of land was belongs to the foreigner. Lease agreement is used as anattempt to cover up the existence of the agreement can be considered as a loan agreementso that the name of the lease agreement is a legal smuggling attempt. This study usesnormative juridical, to obtain the desired data of this study by conducting research librarymaterials or secondary data. The analysis showed that a series of loan agreements includea statement of the name, lease agreement, power of attorney to manage, power of attorneyto sell and lease extension agreement. By the time a foreigner came to the notary for thenotary should be made authentic act more carefully and thoroughly so that if there areindications of an authentic deed may violate the rule of law, the notary can provide legalcounseling. A notary should act trustworthy, honest and thorough, as notaries are requiredto maintain public confidence and the country well.;Bali Province is a major area of Indonesia tourism so that the number of touristswho come to Bali is increasingly every year. This leads to a lot of people both Indonesiancitizens and foreigners keen to stay or open a business in Bali. Basic Agrarian Law statesthat only Indonesian citizens who have the right to own land. Meanwhile, foreigners weregiven the right to occupy land in Indonesia with the right to use and leases on buildings.But in fact many foreigners use nominee agreement and loan agreement to occupy land inBali in the time period they want. The content of Indonesian citizen who appointed to bea nominee states that the true owner of the land is the foreigner because the money sheused for the purchase of land was belongs to the foreigner. Lease agreement is used as anattempt to cover up the existence of the agreement can be considered as a loan agreementso that the name of the lease agreement is a legal smuggling attempt. This study usesnormative juridical, to obtain the desired data of this study by conducting research librarymaterials or secondary data. The analysis showed that a series of loan agreements includea statement of the name, lease agreement, power of attorney to manage, power of attorneyto sell and lease extension agreement. By the time a foreigner came to the notary for thenotary should be made authentic act more carefully and thoroughly so that if there areindications of an authentic deed may violate the rule of law, the notary can provide legalcounseling. A notary should act trustworthy, honest and thorough, as notaries are requiredto maintain public confidence and the country well., Bali Province is a major area of Indonesia tourism so that the number of touristswho come to Bali is increasingly every year. This leads to a lot of people both Indonesiancitizens and foreigners keen to stay or open a business in Bali. Basic Agrarian Law statesthat only Indonesian citizens who have the right to own land. Meanwhile, foreigners weregiven the right to occupy land in Indonesia with the right to use and leases on buildings.But in fact many foreigners use nominee agreement and loan agreement to occupy land inBali in the time period they want. The content of Indonesian citizen who appointed to bea nominee states that the true owner of the land is the foreigner because the money sheused for the purchase of land was belongs to the foreigner. Lease agreement is used as anattempt to cover up the existence of the agreement can be considered as a loan agreementso that the name of the lease agreement is a legal smuggling attempt. This study usesnormative juridical, to obtain the desired data of this study by conducting research librarymaterials or secondary data. The analysis showed that a series of loan agreements includea statement of the name, lease agreement, power of attorney to manage, power of attorneyto sell and lease extension agreement. By the time a foreigner came to the notary for thenotary should be made authentic act more carefully and thoroughly so that if there areindications of an authentic deed may violate the rule of law, the notary can provide legalcounseling. A notary should act trustworthy, honest and thorough, as notaries are requiredto maintain public confidence and the country well.]"

"Jual beli secara lisan yang menjadi dasar penguasaan sertipikat objek jual beli oleh Pembeli dan dititipkan oleh Pembeli kepada Notaris/PPAT, seharusnya disimpan dan dikembalikan oleh Notaris/PPAT kepada Pembeli. Hal ini disebabkan walaupun sertipikat objek jual beli masih terdaftar atas nama Penjual, Notaris/PPAT harus menjaga sertipikat objek jual beli yang dititipkan kepadanya sebagai kewajiban menjaga amanah yang diberikan oleh Pembeli yang melakukan penitipan sertipikat. Adapun permasalahan yang dibahas dalam penelitian ini adalah mengenai status kepemilikan tanah dalam jual beli tanah yang dilakukan secara lisan, serta tanggung jawab Notaris/PPAT yang menerima penitipan sertipikat dari Pembeli namun menyerahkan sertipikat tersebut kepada Penjual berdasarkan kasus yang diangkat dari Putusan Kasasi Mahkamah Agung Nomor 2548 K/PDT/2022. Pembahasan penelitian ini dilakukan melalui studi kepustakaan dan analisis putusan dengan wawancara sebagai pendukung. Untuk menjawab permasalah dalam penelitian ini digunakan metode penelitian doktrinal, dengan tipologi penelitian eksplanatoris. Berdasarkan hasil analisis diketahui bahwa status kepemilikan tanah dalam jual beli tanah yang dilakukan secara lisan harus memenuhi asas terang dan tunai pada saat yang bersamaan untuk beralihnya kepemilikan dari penjual kepada pembeli. Tindakan Notaris/PPAT yang menerima penitipan sertipikat dari Pembeli namun menyerahkan sertipikat tersebut kepada Penjual telah melanggar Pasal 16 ayat (1) huruf a Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 tentang Perubahan Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 tentang Jabatan Notaris untuk senantiasa bertindak amanah, jujur, saksama, mandiri, tidak berpihak. Serta melanggar Pasal 3 Kode Etik PPAT mengenai kewajiban untuk bekerja penuh tanggung jawab, mandiri, jujur, dan tidak berpihak serta memberi pelayanan dengan sebaik-baiknya kepada pengguna jasanya. serta telah melanggar Pasal 1719 KUHPerdata mengenai larangan penerima titipan mengembalikan barang titipan kepada pihak yang tidak menyerahkan barang titipan kepadanya. Atas pelanggaran pasal-pasal tersebut maka Notaris/PPAT bertanggung jawab secara perdata dan berisiko untuk menerima sanksi baik dalam jabatannya selaku Notaris maupun PPAT berupa peringatan tertulis hingga pemberhentian sementara.

---

The verbal sale and purchase binding agreement which forms as the basis for the possession of the land certificate of the object of sale and purchase by the Buyer and is handed over by the buyer to the Notary/PPAT, should be kept and returned by the Notary/PPAT to the Buyer. This is because even though the land certificate of the object of sale and purchase is still registered in the name of the Seller, the Notary/PPAT must keep the land certificate of the object of sale and purchase handed over to him as an obligation to maintain the trust given by the Buyer who carried out the safekeeping of the land certificate. The issues discussed in this study are regarding the status of land ownership in the sale and purchase of land that is conducted verbally, as well as the responsibility of the Notary/PPAT who received the land certificate for safekeeping from the Buyer but handed over the land certificate to the Seller based on the case raised from the Supreme Court Cassation Decision Number 2548 K/PDT/2022. The discussion of this research was conducted through a literature study and analysis of the Supreme Court's Cassation Decision Number 2548 K/PDT/2022 supported by interviews. To answer the problems in this study, the doctrinal research method was used, with an explanatory research typology. Based on the results of the analysis it is known that the status of land ownership in the sale and purchase of land that is conducted verbally must fulfill the principle of terang and tunai simultaneously for the transfer of land ownership from the Seller to the Buyer. The action of a Notary/PPAT who received the land certificate from the Buyer but handed over the land certificate to the Seller has violated Article 16 paragraph (1) letter a of Law Number 2 of 2014 regarding Amendments to Law Number 30 of 2004 regarding the Notary Profession to always act in a trustworthy manner, honest, thorough, independent, impartial. As well as violating Article 3 of the PPAT Code of Conducts regarding the obligation to work responsibly, independently, honesty and impartially and provide the best possible service to service users. Also, having violated Article 1719 of the Indonesian Civil Code regarding the prohibition of the recipient of the deposit from returning the item entrusted to a party who does not hand over the item entrusted to him. For violations of these articles, the Notary/PPAT has civil liability and is at risk of receiving sanctions both in his position as a Notary and PPAT in the form of a written warning to temporary dismissal."

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai tanggung jawab Notaris terhadap pembuatan akta pendirian dan pendaftaran Perkumpulan yang menggunakan nama instansi pemerintah. Permasalahan yang terjadi di dalam kasus tersebut adalah pemakaian nama Perkumpulan yang menggunakan nama lembaga pemerintahan sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 59 ayat (1) huruf a Undang-undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2017 tentang Penetapan Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2017 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-undang Nomor 17 Tahun 2013 tentang Organisasi Kemasyarakatan Menjadi Undang-undang ("UU No. 16 Tahun 2017"). Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis-normatif yaitu mengacu pada asas-asas hukum tertulis. Sedangkan jenis data yang digunakan adalah data sekunder yaitu berupa peraturan perundang-undangan, buku-buku yang berkaitan dengan penelitian dan sumber dari website atau dokumen dari internet yang dapat mendukung kepentingan penelitian yang ditulis oleh Penulis. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah bahwa kedudukan hukum Perkumpulan tersebut sebagai badan hukum telah melanggar ketentuan yang diatur dalam UU No. 16 Tahun 2017 dan tindakan notaris yang membuat akta pendirian dan mendaftarkan Perkumpulan tersebut telah melanggar ketentuan Undang-undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 tentang Jabatan Notaris jo. Undang-undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 tentang Jabatan Notaris ("UUJN") dan Kode Etik Notaris. Oleh karena itu, terhadap pelanggaran tersebut, Perkumpulan tersebut dijatuhi sanksi administratif sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 61 ayat (1) dan Pasal 80A UU No. 16 Tahun 2017 dan notaris yang membuat akta pendirian dan mendaftarkan Perkumpulan tersebut dijatuhi sanksi administratif sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 85 UUJN dan sanksi organisasi sebagaimana diatur dalam Kode Etik Notaris.

---

This Thesis discusses the responsibility of the Notary for making deed of establishment and registration of Association that using government institution name. The problem that occurs in the case is the use of the name of the Association that using government institution name as stipulated in Article 59 paragraph (1) letter a of Law Number 16 of 2017 about the Establishment of Government Regulations in lieu of Law Number 2 of 2017 about Amendments to Law Number 17 of 2013 about Community Organizations Becoming Laws ("Law No. 16 of 2017"). This research is juridical-normative research which refers to the principles of written law. While the type of data used is secondary data, namely in the form of legistation, books relating to research and sources from websites or documents from the internet that can support research interests written by the author. The results of this study are that the legal position of the Association as a legal entity has violated the provisions stipulated in Law No. 16 of 2017 and the actions of the notary who made the deed of establishment and registered the Association violated the provisions of Law Number 30 of 2004 about Notary Position ("UUJN") and Notary Code of Ethics. Therefore, for these violations, the Association was given administrative sanctions as stipulated in Article 61 paragraph (1) and Article 80A of Law No. 16 of 2017 and the notary who makes the deed of establishment and registers the Association is subject to administrative sanctions as provided in Article 85 of the UUJN and organizational sanctions as stipulated in the Notary Code of Ethics."