"
Akta Keterangan Ahli Waris sebagai akta autentik yang dibuat di hadapan notaris
seharusnya mengandung pernyataan yang dapat dipertanggungjawabkan kebenarannya oleh
ahli waris dan saksi fakta. Namun dalam kenyataannya terdapat keterangan palsu di dalam Akta
Keterangan Ahli Waris yang disampaikan oleh ahli waris dan dibenarkan oleh saksi fakta
sebagaimana ditemukan di dalam Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Surabaya No. 44/PDT/2022/PT
SBY. Oleh karena itu, permasalahan yang diangkat di dalam penelitian ini adalah tentang
urgensi peran saksi fakta di dalam Akta Keterangan Ahli Waris dan tanggung jawab saksi fakta
di dalam Akta Keterangan Ahli Waris dengan keterangan palsu. Untuk dapat menjawab
permasalahan tersebut dilakukan penelitian doktrinal menggunakan data sekunder berupa
bahan-bahan hukum yang dikumpulkan melalui studi kepustakaan, yang dianalisis secara
kualitatif. Dari hasil analisis dijelaskan bahwa urgensi peran saksi fakta di dalam Akta
Keterangan Ahli Waris sangat penting karena mendukung pernyataan ahli waris selaku
penghadap terkait riwayat hidup pewaris dan kebenaran dari dokumen-dokumen yang
diperlukan dalam pembuatan Akta Keterangan Ahli Waris. Saksi fakta tidak sama dengan saksi
akta karena saksi fakta merupakan penghadap yang mengetahui kebenaran materiil dari sebuah
Akta Keterangan Ahli Waris, sedangkan saksi akta hanya mengetahui kebenaran formil dari
akta. Kehadiran saksi fakta dalam pembuatan Akta Keterangan Ahli Waris tidak wajib namun
dalam perkembangan praktik kenotariatan, keberadaan saksi fakta untuk menegaskan
kebenaran riwayat hidup pewaris menjadi penting. Keberadaan saksi fakta belum mendapatkan
kepastian hukum karena tidak ada peraturan perundang-undangan yang secara tegas mengatur
kedudukan, syarat, dan perannya. Adapun terkait tanggung jawab dapat dijelaskan bahwa
sebagai penghadap yang turut memberikan keterangan palsu di dalam Akta Keterangan Ahli
Waris, saksi fakta dapat dimintakan pertanggungjawaban perdata atas Perbuatan Melawan
Hukum sebagaimana diatur di dalam Pasal 1365 Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Perdata dan
pidana atas tindakan penyertaan pemalsuan akta autentik yang dirumuskan pada Pasal 55 ayat
(1) KUHP jo. Pasal 264 ayat (1).
Deed of Acknowledgment of Inheritance, which is an authentic deed made by a notary,
should contain statements whose truth can be confirmed by the heirs and the witness of fact.
However, in reality there is a false information in a Deed of Acknowledgment of Inheritance
made by the heirs and confirmed by the witness of fact as found in the case of Surabaya High
Court Decision No. 44/PDT/2022/PT SBY. Therefore, the problem raised in this research is
the urgency of the role of the witness of fact in the Deed of Acknowledgment of Inheritance.
Furthermore, regarding the responsibilities of the witness of fact in the Deed of
Acknowledgment of Inheritance that contains false information is also analyzed in this
research. To answer this problem, doctrinal research was carried out, using secondary data
in the form of legal materials collected through literature study, which was analyzed
qualitatively. The result of this research explained that the urgency of the role of fact witness
in the Deed of Acknowledgment of Inheritance is very important because they support the
statement that is delivered by the the heir and the veracity of the documents required in the
making of the Deed of Acknowledgment of Inheritance. Fact witnesses are often mistakenly
equated with deed witnesses in the making of authentic deeds. In fact, a witness of fact is not
the same as a deed witness because a witness of fact is a person who knows the material truth
of a Deed of Acknowledgment of Inheritance, which is different from a deed witness who is a
witness in the making of an authentic deed that only knows the formal truth of the deed. Thus
far, the presence of fact witnesses in the making of the Deed of Acknowledgement of Inheritance
is not mandatory, but in the development of notarial practice, the presence of fact witnesses to
confirm the truth of the testator’s life history has become important. Recognition of the
existence of fact witnesses in general has not received legal certainty because by far there are
no statutory regulations that explicitly regulate the standing, requirements and role of fact
witnesses. As for the responsibilities of fact witnesses, it can be explained that as persons who
provide false information in the Deed of Acknowledgment of Inheritance, fact witnesses can be
held civilly responsible, namely responsibility for Unlawful Acts as regulated in Article 1365
of the Civil Code and criminal charges for partaking in a criminal act as formulated in Article
55 paragraph (1) jo. Article 264 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code.
"
