Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Pada hakekatnya jabatan Notaris lahir karena kebutuhan masyarakat yang kemudian diangkat oleh Pemerintah yang memperoleh kewenangan secara atributif dari Negara khususnya dalam hal membuat akta-akta otentik. Namun dalam praktiknya tidak sedikit Notaris melanggar Peraturan Jabatan Notaris, Kode Etik, dan Sumpah Jabatannya. Salah satu contoh pelanggaran yang dapat dilakukan oleh Profesi Notaris yaitu bekerja sama dengan kawan Notaris lainnya untuk memanfaatkan ketidaktahuan atau kelemahan klien mereka. Berdasarkan uraian tersebut penulis merumuskan pokok permasalahan dalam penulisan ini yaitu pertama bagaimana perbutan dan keabsahan pembuatan Akta No. 823/XII/2002 tertanggal 20 Desember 2002, yang dibuat dihadapan Notaris X ditinjau dari Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata, Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 tentang Jabatan Notaris, dan Kode Etik Notaris ?. Dan yang kedua bagaimana pertimbangan hukum dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 1731 K/PDT/2013 Juncto Nomor 2290 K/PDT/2008/MARI terhadap perbuatan yang dilakukan oleh Notaris X ditinjau dari ketentuan Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata?. Menggunakan Metode penelitian yaitu penelitian yuridis-normatif dan menggunakan data sekunder. Analisis yang dilakukan adalah analisis kualitatif. Hasil penelitian ini, diketahui bahwa hal-hal tersebut dapat mengakibatkan akta yang dibuat menjadi dapat dibatalkan, batal demi hukum, dan atau akta tersebut menjadi akta dibawah tangan oleh Hakim yang berwenang mengadili. Jika dalam Amarnya Hakim menyatakan bahwa Akta tersebut dibatalkan maka konsekuensinya Akta tersebut tidak lagi berlaku sejak putusan Hakim tersebut ditetapkan, sedangkan jika Hakim menyatakan Akta tersebut batal demi hukum, maka Akta itu dianggap tidak pernah ada sehingga pihak-pihak yang menyebabkan kekacauan harus mengembalikan kekacauan tersebut ke keadaan semula. Sedangkan bagi Notaris yang bersangkutan dapat dikenai sanksi baik secara perdata, sanksi pidana dan sanksi administratif dari Majelis Pengawas Notaris.

---

In effect the post of Notary born out of necessity that were then appointed by the Government that derive attributive authority of the State, especially in terms of making authentic deeds. However, in practice, not least a rule violation Notary Notary, Code of Ethics, and the oath of office. One example of violations can be done by the Notary profession by working with other comrades Notary using the ignorance or weakness of their clients.

Based on these descriptions writer formulate the main problem in this writing is first how perbutan and the validity of making Deed No. 823 / XII / 2002 dated December 20, 2002, before a Notary X in terms of the draft Civil Code, Act No. 2 of 2014 on the Amendment of Act No. 30 of 2004 concerning Notary and Notary Code?. And secondly how legal considerations in Supreme Court of The Republic of Indonesia Decision No. 1731 K / PDT / 2013 Juncto No. 2290 K / PDT / 2008 / MARI against the actions undertaken by the Notary X in terms of the provisions of the Civil Law Act ?.

Using a research method that juridical-normative research and secondary data. Analysis is conducted qualitative analysis. The results of this study, it is known that these things can lead deed made becomes irreversible, null and void, and it becomes a deed or deed under hand by a judge with jurisdiction over . If the verdict the judge stated that the deed was canceled consequently Act is no longer applicable since the Judge's decision is set, whereas if the judge expressed This amendment is null and void, then deed it has never been considered so that the parties that caused chaos must restore the chaos to its original state. As for Notary concerned may sanction either civil, criminal sanctions and administrative sanctions from the Supervisory Council of Notaries."

"Penelitian ini membahas mengenai Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Gianyar Nomor 10/Pdt.G/2018/PN.Gin, yang mana terdapat gugatan terhadap Notaris yang melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum dalam hal pembuatan Akta Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli (PPJB) dan Akta Kuasa Menjual diluar pengetahuan dari salah satu pihak, dan Akta Kuasa Menjual tersebut juga dibuat oleh Notaris dimana pihak pembeli belum melakukan pelunasan kepada penjual, selain hal tersebut, Notaris dalam membuat aktanya juga melakukan rekayasa tanggal serta mencantumkan keterangan yang tidak benar mengenai tempat penandatanganan akta. Permasalahan yang akan diambil adalah mengenai akibat hukum dari akta yang dibuat secara melawan hukum serta tanggung jawab notaris dan akibat hukum terhadap pembatalan akta-akta yang dibuatnya. Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian yuridis normatif, dengan menggunakan tipologi penelitian deskriptif analitis, yang menggunakan data sekunder serta alat pengumpulan data yang digunakan adalah studi dokumen. Hasil penelitian diperoleh bahwa Putusan PN Nomor 10/Pdt.G/2018/PN.Gin telah sebagian sesuai dengan ketentuan perundang-undangan dan telah menyatakan notaris terbukti melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum, yang berakibat akta notaris menjadi batal demi hukum, serta pelanggaran atas kebenaran formal akta memiliki akibat hukum akta autentik tersebut kehilangan keautentisitasannya. Dengan adanya pembatalan akta notaris memiliki akibat hukum bahwa kembalinya hubungan hukum serta penguasaan objek perjanjian menjadi seperti tidak pernah terjadi perjanjian.

---

This study discusses the Decision of the Gianyar District Court Number 10/Pdt.G/2018/PN.Gin, where there is a lawsuit against a Notary who commits an unlawful act in the matter of making a Deed of Conditional Sale and Purchase Agreement (PPJB) and a Selling Authorization Deed without the knowledge of one of the parties, and the Selling Authorization Deed is also made by a Notary where the buyer has not paid off to the seller, other than this, the Notary in making the deed also includes incorrect date and includes incorrect information about the place of signing of the deed. The problems that will be taken are about the legal consequences of the deeds made in an unlawful manner and the responsibility of the notary and the legal consequences of the cancellation of the deeds he made. This study uses normative juridical research, using descriptive analytical research typology, which uses secondary data and data collection tools used are document studies. The results showed that the PN Decision Number 10/ Pdt.G/2018/PN.Gin had been partially in accordance with statutory provisions and had stated that the notary was proven to have committed an unlawful act, which resulted in the notary deed being null and void, and violation of formal truth the deed has the legal effect that the authentic deed loses its authenticity. With the cancellation of the notary deed, there is a legal consequence that the return of legal relations and the control of the object of the agreement are as if there had never been an agreement."

"[Perbuatan Melawan Hukum diartikan sebagai suatu perbuatan yang melanggar hukum tertulis maupun hukum tidak tertulis. Dalam hal ini Notaris telah membuat akta Perubahan anggaran dasar CV yang melawan hukum dikarenakan adanya kelalaian Notaris dalam membuat minuta akta, yang mana notaris tidak memintakan bukti fisik dari surat kuasa pihak yang berkepentingan dalam akta sehingga terdapat keterangan palsu dalam akta tersebut. Dalam hal ini bagaimana prosedur pembuatan akta menurut Undang-Undang dan apa akibat hukum terhadap akta tersebut yang dibuat tidak sesuai undang-undang serta apa sanksi yang dikenakan terhadap notaris yang melakukan pelanggaran tersebut, Dalam penelitian ini menggunakan metode kepustakaan yaitu metode yang memiliki kegiatan mengumpulkan data sekunder yang dapat berupa bahan hukum primer maupun bahan hukum sekunder. Analisa kasus dilakukan terhadap putusan Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru Nomor 116/Pdt/G/2012/Pn.Pbr, dan adapun prosedur pembuatan akta notaris yang dibuat oleh (akta relaas) atau dihadapan (akta partij) Notaris dan akibat dari tidak dibuatnya akta menurut Undang-Undang adalah akta tersebut batal demi hukum. Sanksi yang dikenakan pada notaris tersebut bisa berupa sanksi perdata, sanksi pidana, dan sanksi administratif. Dalam hal ini Notaris hendaknya memiliki sifat kehati-hatian, ketelitian dan memiliki itikad baik dalam pembuatan akta otentik serta mematuhi ketentuan hukum yang berlaku dan berlandaskan pada moral dan etika.

---

Unlawful acts defined as an act in violation of written law and unwritten law. In this case notary had been made of amendment the articles of partnership CV that unlawful because of negligence in making notarial deed, notary did not ask physical evidence the power of attorney of interested parties in the act so there is false information in the act. In this case how the deed manufacturing procedures according to law and what sanctions are imposed on the notary who committed the offense, In thisresearch literature using the methods that have a secondary data gathering activities that

can be either primary law materials or secondary legal materials. In this case analysis to the decisions of the District Court of Pekanbaru Number 116/Pdt/G/2012/Pn.Pbr. and as for making procedure that is created by (deed party) or presence (announcement notarial) deed, and the consequences of the deed not made under the act is the deed is null and void, and sanctions imposed on the notary which are able to form civil sanctions, criminal sanctions, and administrative sanctions. In this case notary should have a prudent nature, thoroughness, and good faith in making authentic deed and to comply with applicable law and based on moral and ethical. Unlawful acts defined as an act in violation of written law and unwritten law. In this case notary had been made of amendment the articles of partnership CV that unlawful because of negligence in making notarial deed, notary did not ask physical

evidence the power of attorney of interested parties in the act so there is false information in the act. In this case how the deed manufacturing procedures according to law and what sanctions are imposed on the notary who committed the offense, In this research literature using the methods that have a secondary data gathering activities that can be either primary law materials or secondary legal materials. In this case analysis to the decisions of the District Court of Pekanbaru Number 116/Pdt/G/2012/Pn.Pbr. and as for making procedure that is created by (deed party) or presence (announcement notarial) deed, and the consequences of the deed not made under the act is the deed is null and void, and sanctions imposed on the notary which are able to form civil sanctions, criminal sanctions, and administrative sanctions. In this case notary should have a prudent nature, thoroughness, and good faith in making authentic deed and to comply with applicable law and based on moral and ethical.;Unlawful acts defined as an act in violation of written law and unwritten law. In

this case notary had been made of amendment the articles of partnership CV that

unlawful because of negligence in making notarial deed, notary did not ask physical

evidence the power of attorney of interested parties in the act so there is false

information in the act. In this case how the deed manufacturing procedures according to

law and what sanctions are imposed on the notary who committed the offense, In this

research literature using the methods that have a secondary data gathering activities that

can be either primary law materials or secondary legal materials. In this case analysis to

the decisions of the District Court of Pekanbaru Number 116/Pdt/G/2012/Pn.Pbr. and as

for making procedure that is created by (deed party) or presence (announcement

notarial) deed, and the consequences of the deed not made under the act is the deed is

null and void, and sanctions imposed on the notary which are able to form civil

sanctions, criminal sanctions, and administrative sanctions. In this case notary should

have a prudent nature, thoroughness, and good faith in making authentic deed and to

comply with applicable law and based on moral and ethical., Unlawful acts defined as an act in violation of written law and unwritten law. In

this case notary had been made of amendment the articles of partnership CV that

unlawful because of negligence in making notarial deed, notary did not ask physical

evidence the power of attorney of interested parties in the act so there is false

information in the act. In this case how the deed manufacturing procedures according to

law and what sanctions are imposed on the notary who committed the offense, In this

research literature using the methods that have a secondary data gathering activities that

can be either primary law materials or secondary legal materials. In this case analysis to

the decisions of the District Court of Pekanbaru Number 116/Pdt/G/2012/Pn.Pbr. and as

for making procedure that is created by (deed party) or presence (announcement

notarial) deed, and the consequences of the deed not made under the act is the deed is

null and void, and sanctions imposed on the notary which are able to form civil

sanctions, criminal sanctions, and administrative sanctions. In this case notary should

have a prudent nature, thoroughness, and good faith in making authentic deed and to

comply with applicable law and based on moral and ethical.]"

"ABSTRAKTesis ini membahas perbuatan notaris khususnya dalam menerbitkan aktapendirian dan perpanjangannya tanpa persetujuan dari pendiri atau kuasanyasebagaimana yang diatur dalam Pasal 10 ayat 1 Undang-undang Yayasan ataumelakukan perubahan anggaran dasar tanpa didasarkan oleh keputusan rapatPembina sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 18 ayat 1 Undang-undang Yayasandapat dikatakan sebagai Perbuatan Melawan Hukum apabila memenuhi unsurunsurdalam Pasal 1365 KUHPerdata. Pada kasus dalam tesis ini, Penulismenjelaskan bahwa Pihak Penggugat selaku pihak yang dirugikan mengajukangugatan atas terbitnya Akta Nomor 2 Tahun 2004 tanggal 3 Nopember 2004dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Nomor 77/Pdt.G/2010/PN.PL juncto PutusanPengadilan Tinggi Nomor 47PDT/2011/PT.PALU juncto Putusan MahkamahAgung Nomor 1873 K/Pdt/2012. Penggugat sebagai pendiri dan ketua Yayasanberdasarkan Akta Pendirian Yayasan Nomor : 105 tanggal 10 Nopember 1971juncto Akta Notaris Nomor : 4 tanggal 4 Maret 1986 menggugat dan memohonpada pengadilan agar menyatakan bahwa perbuatan Notaris tersebut dalammenerbitkan Akta Nomor 2 Tahun 2004 adalah perbuatan melawan hukum danAkta Notaris Nomor 2 Tahun 2004 cacat dan tidak mempunyai kekuatanmengikat. Notaris yang terbukti telah melakukan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum,harus bertanggung jawab untuk mengganti kerugian serta dikenakan sanksi sesuaiyang diatur dalam peraturan perundang-undangan.

---

ABSTRACTThis Thesis discuss about notary actions particularly in issuing the deed andextensions thereof without the consent of the founders or their proxies asstipulated in Article 10 paragraph 1 of Foundation Law or make an amendment ofArticles of Association Foundation without grounded by decision of the meetingof Trustees as stipulated in Article 18 paragraph 1 of Foundation Law can beregarded as torts if it meets the elements in Article 1365 of the Civil Code. In thecase of this thesis, the author explains that the Parties to the Plaintiff as theinjured party filed the lawsuit on the publication of Notarial Deed No. 2 Year2004 dated November 3, 2004 in the District Court's Decision No. 77/Pdt.G /2010 / PN.PL in conjunction with the High Court No.47PDT/2011/PT.PALUconjunction Supreme Court Decision No. 1873 K/Pdt/2012. Plaintiff as thefounder and chairman of the Foundation based on Notarial Deed Foundation No.105 dated November 10, 1971 in conjunction with the Notarial Deed No. 4 datedMarch 4, 1986 sued and appealed to the court to declare that the action of theNotary in issuing Act No. 2 Year 2004 is against the law and Notarial Deed No. 2Year 2004 disabled and has no binding force. Any notary who proved to havedone Torts, shall be liable to indemnify and appropriate sanctions stipulated in thelegislation."

"Tesis ini meneliti mengenai akibat hukum kesengajaan Notaris yang merubah isi akta tanpa dikehendaki oleh para pihak. Notaris yang bukan merupakan pihak dalam akta, tidak diperkenankan merubah isi akta yang merupakan kehendak dari para pihak. Permasalahan yang akan dibahas dalam tesis ini adalah bagaimana akibat hukum terhadap akta dan para pihak atas kesengajaan Notaris yang merubah isi akta perjanjian kerjasama tanpa dikehendaki para pihak, serta bagaimana tanggung jawab Notaris ditinjau dari berbagai aspek hukum terkait perbuatannya yang merubah isi akta. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif yang menekankan pada norma-norma hukum tertulis dengan pendekatan yuridis yang mempergunakan sumber data sekunder, digunakan untuk menganalisis berbagai peraturan perundang-undangan di bidang jabatan Notaris, bidang hukum perdata dan bidang hukum pidana, buku-buku dan artikel-artikel yang mempunyai korelasi dan relevan dengan permasalahan yang akan diteliti.Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa, akibat hukum atas perbuatan Notaris tersebut terhadap para pihak ialah PT BI sebagai pihak yang dirugikan tidak dapat mengajukan gugatan perbuatan melawan hukum karena perkaranya telah dinyatakan Nebis In Idem sebelumnya dan akibat hukum terhadap aktanya menjadi pembuktian di bawah tangan. Lalu tanggung jawab Notaris dari aspek jabatan Notaris ialah Notaris dapat dituntut penggantian biaya, ganti rugi, dan bunga sebagaimana Pasal 48 ayat 3 UUJNP, sedangkan dari aspek hukum perdata Notaris dapat dikenakan sanksi ganti rugi atas gugatan perbuatan melawan hukum yang diajukan kepadanya dan dari aspek hukum pidana Notaris dapat dijatuhi hukuman penjara maksimal 8 delapan tahun penjara sebagaimana Pasal 264 ayat 1 subsidair Pasal 263 ayat 1 KUHPidana.

---

This thesis examines the legal consequences of a notary which alter the contents of the deed without the will of the parties. Notary which wasn rsquo t included as the party in the deed is not allowed to amend the contents of the deed which is the will of the parties. The Content Amendment of the deed may be changed by a notary in accordance with the UUNJP regulated procedures. In this study, the author raises 2 two main issues, the first is about the the legal effect on the deed and the parties that caused by a notary which deliberately alter the contents of the deed without obtaining consent from the parties. The second issue is about the responsibility of the notary in terms of various aspects of the law related to his action when modifying the contents of the deed as in the Supreme Court Decision number 1003k PID 2015 and the decision of Pekanbaru District Court number 247 Pdt.G 2016 PN PNBR. This study uses a normative juridical method that emphasizes the juridical norms which use secondary data sources, used the analyze various laws and regulations in the notary incumbency field, the field of civil law and the field of criminal law, books and articles that correlated and revelant with the problem to be studied.The results of this study indicate that the legal consequences of the notarial act against the parties which in this case is PT BI as the aggrieved party can not file a lawsuit against the law because the case has been declared as Nebis in Idem and the consequences of the act becoming a proof under the hand. Notary responsibility on this case from the aspect of notary incumbency is the claim for cost reimbursement, compensation, and interest as stated on article 48 paragraph 3 UUJNP, while from the aspect of civily law Notary can be claimed a sanctioned compensation on the lawsuit against the law and for the criminal law aspect, the notary may be sentenced to maximum 8 years imprisonment as stated on Article 264 paragraph 1 subsidiary Article 263 paragraph 1 of the criminal code."

"Pembatalan Akta Pernyataan Keputusan Rapat (“Akta PKR”) oleh pengadilan terjadi dikarenakan akta yang dibuat tidak dikehendaki oleh pemilik saham sah yang menyatakan tidak pernah melakukan Rapat Umum Pemegang Saham Luar Biasa (“RUPSLB”), sebagaimana termuat dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 690 PK/Pdt/2021. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini yaitu adanya penghibahan saham secara sepihak tanpa sepengetahuan pemilik saham, dalam hal ini dikaji secara mendalam dari sisi notaris sebagai pembuat Akta PKR. Apakah notaris memenuhi unsur-unsur perbuatan melawan hukum dalam proses pembuatan Akta PKR tersebut, serta bagaimana kekuatan pembuktian Akta Notaril PKR yang dibuat berdasarkan risalah rapat yang tidak dihadiri notaris tersebut. Untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut, dipergunakan metode penelitian doktrinal, dengan pengumpulan data secara kepustakaan untuk memperoleh data sekunder, dan metode analisis data secara kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa kekuatan pembuktian akta notariil PKR yang dibuat berdasarkan risalah RUPSLB yang tidak dihadiri notaris adalah sempurna selama tidak mengalami cacat formil dalam ketentuan Pasal 1320 KUHPerdata, serta untuk pemenuhan unsur perbuatan melawan hukum notaris berdasarkan Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 690 PK/Pdt/2021, didapatkan hasil bahwa Notaris MN telah memenuhi seluruh unsur perbuatan melawan hukum yang mengakibatkan timbulnya permohonan ganti rugi sebagaimana Pasal 1365 KUHPerdata. Penggantian kerugian dalam hal ini tidak dalam bentuk uang, melainkan pertanggungjawaban notaris untuk mengembalikan saham kepada keadaan semula.

---

The cancellation of the Deed of Statement of Meeting Resolutions ("PKR Deed") by the court occurred because the deed that was made was not desired by the legal shareholders who stated that they had never held an Extraordinary General Meeting of Shareholders ("EGMS"), as stated in the Supreme Court Decision Number 690 PK /Pdt/2021. The problem in this research is that there is a unilateral donation of shares without the knowledge of the share owner, in this case it is studied in depth from the perspective of the notary as the maker of the PKR Deed. Does the notary fulfill the elements of an unlawful act in the process of making the PKR Deed, and what is the strength of the proof of the PKR Notarial Deed which was made based on the minutes of the meeting which the notary was not present at? To answer this problem, doctrinal research methods were used, with library data collection to obtain secondary data, and qualitative data analysis methods. The results of the research show that the evidentiary strength of the PKR notarial deed made based on the minutes of the EGMS which was not attended by a notary is perfect as long as it does not experience any formal defects in the provisions of Article 1320 of the Civil Code, as well as to fulfill the elements of a notary's unlawful act based on Supreme Court Decision Number 690 PK/Pdt/2021 , the results obtained were that the MN Notary had fulfilled all the elements of an unlawful act which resulted in a request for compensation as stated in Article 1365 of the Civil Code. Compensation for losses in this case is not in the form of money, but rather the responsibility of the notary to return the shares to their original condition."

"Tesis ini meneliti mengenai pelanggaran seorang Notaris yang dalam menjalankan jabatannya tidak bertindak amanah, jujur, saksama, mandiri, berpihak, dan tidak menjaga kepentingan pihak yang terkait dalam perbuatan hukum. Sebagai pejabat umum, Notaris bertangggung jawab terhadap jabatannya dan akta autentik yang dibuatnya. Notaris seingkali melupakan kode etik dan sumpah jabatan yang diucapkannya, sehingga kemudian melakukan pelanggaran. Dalam penelitian ini, Penulis menangkat 2 dua pokok permasalahan, yang pertama adalah Bagaimana tanggung jawab Notaris yang tidak mandiri dan berpihak terhadap para pihak dalam akta? Sedangkan yang kedua adalah Bagaimana akibat hukum terhadap akta yang dibuat oleh Notaris yang tidak mandiri dan berpihak?. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif yang menekankan pada norma-norma hukum tertulis dengan pendekatan yuridis yang mempergunakan sumber data sekunder, digunakan untuk menganalisis berbagai peraturan perundang-undanganan di bidang jabatan Notaris, bidang hukum perdata dan bidang hukum pidana, buku-buku dan artikel-artikel yang mempunyai korelasi dan relevan dengan permasalahan yang diteliti. Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa tanggung jawab Notaris terhadap perbuatannya tersebut dari aspek jabatan Notaris adalah Notaris dapat diberikan sanksi administratif, sedangkan dari aspek hukum perdata Notaris dapat dikenakan sanksi ganti rugi atas gugatan perbuatan melawan hukum, dan dari aspek hukum pidana Notaris dapat dijatuhi hukuman terkait pemalsuan akta. Akibat hukum atas perbuatan Notaris tersebut terhadap aktanya adalah akta tersebut tetap autentik selama tidak dimintakan pembatalan oleh para pihak.

---

In carrying out their duties, a notary shall act trsustworthy, honest, thorough, independent, impartial , and safeguard the interests of the parties involved in legal actions. As public functionary, a notary responsible for their act and the authentic deed. Notary often neglect the Notary public codes of conduct and forget their oath, and committed an offences act. In this research, the writer raise 2 two main issues, the first is how is the responsibility of a Notary that is not independent for the parties in the deed While for the second is how is the consequences for the deed that made by a not independent Notary The methods used in this research is normative legal, Normative legal research involves the study of the law as an object and removes any non legal material from the scope of this research. The result of the research indicated that the responsibility of a notary from the aspect of the Notary, a Notary can be given an administrative sentence, while from the aspect of civil law, a Notary can be liable to compensation for claims from an unlawful act , and from the aspect of criminal law, a Notary can be sentenced to a forgery. The legal consequences of the deed is the deed will be authentic. The injured party may filed a lawsuit and asking for a compensation and a cancellation of the deed."

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai perbuatan melawan hukum yang dilakukan oleh Notaris dalam jabatannya sebagai PPAT karena telah menerbitkan akta kuasa mutlak beserta akta jual beli sebagai turunannya sebagai bentuk penyelundupan hukum dalam kaitannya dengan proses jual beli tanah. Permasalahan yang akan dikaji dalam penelitian ini adalah mengenai keabsahan akta kuasa mutlak yang dikeluarkan oleh Notaris atas dasar penyalahgunaan keadaan, akibat hukum dari akta jual beli yang tidak sesuai kehendak para pihak, serta tanggung jawab Notaris terhadap akta yang dibuatnya. Metode penelitian yang digunakan penulis adalah yuridis normatif dengan studi kepustakaan yang didukung wawancara. Kemudian jenis data yang digunakan adalah jenis data sekunder, baik dari bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder dan juga bahan hukum tersier serta metode analisa yang digunakan penulis adalah pendekatan kualitatif. Kuasa mutlak dalam praktek dilarang karena dibuat untuk menyimpangi aturan-aturan mengenai pemindahan hak atas tanah yang berlaku dengan tujuan untuk memiliki jaminan yang diberikan oleh debitur atau dialihkan kepada orang lain dengan harga yang tidak sesuai dengan nilai jaminan yang seharusnya, Dalam Putusan Nomor: 06/Pdt.G/2018/PN Bln, Notaris dalam kedudukannya sebagai PPAT melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum menerbitkan akta kuasa mutlak dimana akta tersebut dilarang oleh Instruksi Menteri Dalam Negeri Nomor 14 Tahun 1982, sehingga akta tersebut batal demi hukum, begitu juga akta jual beli sebagai turunannya secara otomatis juga batal demi hukum dan dalam hal ini Notaris dapat dimintakan tanggung jawab secara perdata dan administratif. Batalnya kuasa mutlak dan akta jual beli tersebut mengakibatkan keadaan kembali seperti sediakala dimana kedua perjanjian tersebut dianggap tidak pernah ada.

---

This thesis discusses the illegal acts carried out by a Notary in his position as Land deed Official because he has issued an absolute deed of power along with a sale and purchase deed as derivatives as a form of legal smuggling in relation to the process of buying and selling land. The problems that will be examined in this study are the validity of the absolute power deed issued by a Notary on the basis of misuse of the situation, the legal consequences of the deed of buy and purchase that are not in accordance with the wishes of the parties, and the Notary`s responsibility for the deed. The research method used by the author is a normative juridical literature study supported by interviews. Then the type of data used is the type of secondary data, both from primary legal materials, secondary legal materials and also tertiary legal materials and the analysis method used by the author is a qualitative approach. Absolute power in practice is prohibited because it is made to deviate the rules regarding the transfer of applicable land rights with the aim of having guarantees given by the debtor or transferred to others at prices that are not in accordance with the guaranteed value, In Decree Number: 06/Pdt.G/2018/PN Bln, the Notary in his position as Land Deed Official committed an illegal act issuing an absolute power deed where the deed was prohibited by the Minister of Home Affairs Instruction Number 14 of 1982, so that the deed was null and void, so was the sell and purchase agreement automatically also null and void by law and in this case notaries can be asked for civil and administrative responsibilities. The cancellation of the absolute power of attorney and the sell and purchase agreement resulted in the situation returning to where the two agreements were deemed to have never existed."