Analisis Yuridis Normatif Putusan Pencabutan Jabatan Notaris Tanpa Pemberian Salinan Akta (Putusan Ptun Nomor: 235/G/2019/PTUN.KT)

Alfika Salsa Qurrotulaini; Komariah Komariah; Yohana Puspitasari Wardoyo

doi:10.22219/ilrej.v2i2.22194

Authors

Alfika Salsa Qurrotulaini Faculty of Law, University of Muhammadiyah Malang, Indonesia
Komariah Komariah Faculty of Law, University of Muhammadiyah Malang, Indonesia
Yohana Puspitasari Wardoyo Faculty of Law, University of Muhammadiyah Malang, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22219/ilrej.v2i2.22194

Keywords:

Notary, Revocation, Cancellation, Violation of the Code of Ethics

Abstract

A notary is a public official who has the authority to make an authentic deed, which is specifically licensed by the government to sign a document. As a notary, it is necessary to adhere to the guidelines, authority, and code of ethics when carrying out their duties, so that there is no violation of the code of ethics in carrying out their profession. The problems raised in this study are to find out how the process of revocation of a position in a notary is in the right way in accordance with the regulations of Law Number 30 of 2004, the position of a notary, and to find out and examine how to resolve the Administrative Court Decision Number: 235/G/2019/ PTUN.KT. The research method used in this research is normative juridical, namely research with literature studies using primary legal data and secondary legal materials. Based on the results of the study that in carrying out their duties, Notaries must obey and obey the professional code of ethics and be used as guidelines in carrying out their duties, namely the Law on Notary Positions No. 2 of 2014 concerning amendments to Law No. 30 of 2004 concerning Notary Positions. If a notary commits a violation of the code of ethics that is a serious violation, it can be proposed to give sanctions by being dismissed from his position in a dishonorable manner by the Minister at the suggestion of the Central Supervisory Council. Regarding the issuance of a ministerial decree, it is also necessary to apply the General Principles of Good Governance so that there is no cancellation of a disputed object decision because it does not issue the precautionary principle and the need to act according to the principle of accuracy in making a decision. So if there is an annulment of a decision made by the Minister of Law and Human Rights on a State Administrative Decision, it is necessary to have the responsibility to restore and restore the dignity of the Notary whose position is revoked.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arisaputra, Muhammad Ilham. “Kewajiban Notaris Dalam Menjaga Kerahasiaan Akta Dalam Kaitannya Dengan Hak Inkar Notaris.” Perspektif: Kajian Masalah Hukum Dan Pembangunan 17, no. 3 (2012): 53–73. https://doi.org/10.30742/perspektif.v17i3.106.

Arsy, Eudea Adeli, Hanif Nur Widhiyanti, and Patricia Audrey Ruslijanto. “Tanggung Jawab Notaris Terhadap Akta Yang Cacat Hukum Dan Tidak Sesuai Dengan Ketentuan Pembuatan Akta Dalam Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris.” Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum 6, no. 1 (2021): 130–40. https://doi.org/10.23920/jbmh.v6i1.324.

Ayuningtyas, Pratiwi. “Sanksi Terhadap Notaris Dalam Melanggar Kode Etik.” Repertorium: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Kenotariatan Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sriwijaya 9, no. 2 (2020): 51–72. https://doi.org/10.28946/rpt.v9i2.637.

Cahyani, Dela. “Kewenangan Notaris Dalam Pembuatan Akta Yang Berhubungan Dengan Tanah.” Repertorium: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Kenotariatan Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sriwijaya 5, no. 1 (2016): 72–86. https://doi.org/10.28946/rpt.v5i1.174.

Edwar, Edwar, Faisal A.Rani, and Dahlan Ali. “Kedudukan Notais Sebagai Pejabat Umum Ditinjau Dari Konsep Equality Before The Law.” Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana 8, no. 2 (2019): 56–66. https://doi.org/10.24843/JMHU.2019.v08.i02.p05.

Irianto, Sulistyowati. “Metode Penelitian Kualitatif Dalam Metodologi Penelitian Ilmu Hukum.” Jurnal Hukum Dan Pembangunan 32, no. 2 (2002): 155–72. https://doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol32.no2.1339.

Iryadi, Irfan. “Kedudukan Akta Otentik Dalam Hubungannya Dengan Hak Konstitusional Warga Negara, Jurnal Konstitusi.” Jurnal Konstitusi 15, no. 4 (2018): 45–65. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1546.

Kesuma, Diani. “Perkembangan Hukum Acara Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara Terkait Dengan Kewenangan Mengadili Dan Permasalahan Hukumnya.” Selisik 6, no. 1 (2020): 63–73. https://doi.org/10.35814/selisik.v6i1.1704.

Laksana, Prasetya Agung. “Batas-Batas Kewajiban Menjaga Kerahasiaan Notaris Dalam Kaitannya Hak Ingkar Notaris Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Tentang Jabatan Notaris.” Jurnal Akta 3, no. 4 (2016): 54–65. https://doi.org/10.30659/akta.v3i4.2919.

Maridjo, Maridjo. “Fungsi Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara Dalam Rangka Pemerintahan Yang Bersih.” Magister Law Review 2, no. 1 (2021): 56–76. https://doi.org/10.35973/malrev.v2i1.2065.

Merliyani, Dwi, Annalisa Yahanan, and Agus Trisaka. “Kewajiban Pembacaan Akta Otentik Oleh Notaris Di Hadapan Penghadap.” Repertorium: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Kenotariatan Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sriwijaya 9, no. 1 (2020): 45–71. https://doi.org/10.28946/rpt.v9i1.358.

Munajiah, Li. “Peran Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara Dalam Membentuk Tata Kelola Pemerintahan Yang Baik (Studi Di Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Serang).” Al-Qisthas: Jurnal Hukum Dan Politik 8, no. 2 (2017): 23–37. https://jurnal.uinbanten.ac.id/index.php/alqisthas/article/view/1620.

Ramlan. “Hukum Acara Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara.” Kumpulan Jurnal Dosen Universitas Muhammadiyah Sumatera Utara 1, no. 1 (2022): 1–16. http://jurnal.umsu.ac.id/index.php/kumpulandosen/article/view/2121.

Sonata, Depri Liber. “Metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif Dan Empiris: Karakteristik Khas Dari Metode Meneliti Hukum.” FIAT JUSTISIA:Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 8, no. 1 (November 5, 2015): 15–35. https://doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v8no1.283.

Sumiati, Helena. “Kepastian Hukum Sertifikat Hak Milik Atas Tanah Dalam Hukum Pertanahan Indonesia.” Yustisia Merdeka 7, no. 2 (2021): 67–99. https://doi.org/10.33319/yume.v7i2.111.