Preventing Criminalization of Default: Legal Certainty in the Settlement of Debt Agreements
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25041/ip.v6i2.3650Abstract
This research examines the uncertainty in distinguishing fraud and default in debt agreements in Indonesia and its impact on legal certainty. Adopting an empirical normative legal approach, the research analyzes court decisions and relevant legal materials using qualitative methods. It finds that classifying an act as fraud or default depends on whether the agreement is made in bad faith. To enhance legal certainty and prevent the criminalization of good-faith parties, the research proposes several alternatives: establishing guidelines for handling default cases, including compensation for acquitted defendants in court decisions, resolving disputes through simple lawsuits, and utilizing out-of-court settlement mechanisms. The findings provide practical guidance for law enforcement and judicial authorities in differentiating civil defaults from criminal fraud.
Keywords:
Legal Certainty, Fraud, Broken PromisesReferences
Abdul R. Saliman. Hukum Bisnis Untuk Perusahaan. Jakarta: Kencana, 2005.
Abdullah. Penafsiran Hakim Tentang Perbedaan Antara Perkara Wanprestasi Dengan Penipuan. Bogor: Puslitbang Hukum dan Peradilan Badan Litbang Diklat Kumdil MA RI, 2012.
Allan A. Abwunza, Titus K. Peter, dan Kariuki Muigua. “Explaining the Ineffectiveness of Construction Arbitration.” Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction 14, no. 2 (2022): 1943–4170. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000541.
Azhari Ar. “Parameter Menentukan Perbuatan Wanprestasi Dan Penipuan Dari Suatu Perjanjian.” Jurnal Hukum Kaidah: Media Komunikasi dan Informasi Hukum dan Masyarakat 19, no. 3 (2020): 477–98. https://doi.org/10.30743/jhk.v19i3.2826.
B. B. Yustisio, N.A. Sinaga, & Sujono. “Arrangement and Implementation of Pancasila Industrial Relations in Company Regulations and Collective Labor Agreements.” Jurnal Hukum Sehasen 9, no. 2 (2023): 121–32. https://doi.org/10.37676/jhs.v9i2.4661.
D. Puspito, M. Roestamy, & E. Santoso. “Model Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Kreditur Layanan Pinjam Meminjam Uang Berbasis Teknologi Informasi di Masa Pandemi Covid-19.” Jurnal Ilmiah Living Law 14, no. 1 (2022): 11–23. https://doi.org/10.30997/jill.v14i1.5303.
E. Alfian. “Tugas dan Fungsi Kepolisian Untuk Meningkatkan Kepercayaan Publik terhadap Penegak Hukum.” Legalitas: Jurnal Hukum 12, no. 1 (2020): 27–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.33087/legalitas.v12i1.192.
E. Kristiani & Roziqin, J. S. K. P. “Penegakan Hukum Terhadap Pelaku Usaha Yang Melakukan Pemalsuan Beras Law Enforcement Towards Business People Who Commit The Forgery Of Rice.” Jurnal De Fact 6, no. 2 (2020): 62–79. https://doi.org/10.36277/jurnaldefacto.v6i2.70.
Ester Magdalena Robot. Penerapan Pasal 378 KUHP Terhadap Kasus Wanprestasi Pada Perjanjian Utang Piutang. Yogyakarta: Universitas Atmajaya, 2014.
H. Quirk & M. Requa. “The S upreme C ourt on C ompensation for M iscarriages of J ustice: Is it better that ten innocents are denied compensation than one guilty person receives it?” The modern law review 75, no. 3 (2012): 387–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2012.00906.x.
Halilah, Siti, dan Mhd Fakhrurrahman Arif. “Asas Kepastian Hukum Menurut Para Ahli.” Siyasah : Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara 4, no. II (22 Desember 2021). https://ejournal.an-nadwah.ac.id/index.php/Siyasah/article/view/334.
I. Lubis. “Kewenangan BPKP dan Kejaksaan dalam Penentuan Unsur Kerugian Keuangan Negara Terhadap Tindak Pidana Korupsi.” DIKTUM 2, no. 3 (2023): 75–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.46930/diktum.v2i3.3764.
Kana Sasakura. “Compensation for the Wrongfully Convicted.” https://wrongfulconvictionsblog.org, 13 November 2012. https://wrongfulconvictionsblog.org/2012/11/13/compensation-for-the-wrongfully-convicted/.
L. H. A. Dasilva, Leo, R. P., & Kian, D. A. “Upaya Jaksa Selaku Eksekutor dalam Pengembalian Kerugian Keuangan Negara Hasil Tindak Pidana Korupsi:(Studi Kasus di Kejaksaan Negeri Kota Kupang).” Birokrasi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Tata Negara 1, no. 4 (2023): 157–73. https://doi.org/10.55606/birokrasi.v1i4.733.
Marudut Hasiholan Pasaribu. “Implementasi Prinsip Peradilan Cepat, Sederhana Dan Biaya Ringan Dalam Perkara Perdata Di Pengadilan Negeri Samarinda.” Journal of Law (Jurnal Ilmu Hukum) 5, no. 2 (2020): 454–65.
Mashuril Anwar, Besti Lilyana, Dinda Anna Zatika, dan Destu Rizky Syahputra. “Rekonstruksi Paradigma Penegakan Hukum Tindak Pidana Korupsi Di Bidang Bisnis.” Journal of Education, Humaniora and Social Sciences 6, no. 2 (2023): 893–905. https://doi.org/10.34007/jehss.v6i2.1957.
S. D. A. Gaumi & R. Hartono. “Analisa Hukum Sengketa Merek Dagang Geprek Bensu Berdasarkan Asas Kepastian Hukum (Studi Kasus Putusan No. 196/G/2020/PTUN-JKT).” Jurnal Darma Agung 30, no. 2 (2022): 75–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.46930/ojsuda.v30i2.1592.
S. Nurcahyani. “Pelaksanaan Gugatan Sederhana di Pengadilan Negeri dalam Perspektif Kepastian Hukum.” Jurnal Bedah Hukum 7, no. 1 (2023): 68–81. https://doi.org/10.36596/jbh.v7i1.959.
S. Satiah & Amalia, R. A,. “Kajian Tentang Wanprestasi Dalam Hubungan Perjanjian.” Jatiswara 32, no. 6 (2021): 126–39. https://doi.org/10.29303/jtsw.v36i2.280.
Tori R. A. Kricken. “Rape is Not a Contract: Recognizing the Fundamental Diffifficulties in Applying Economic Theories of Jurisprudence to Criminal Sexual Assault.” Wyoming Law Review 19, no. 2 (2019): 478–515.
V.S. Yuniarti. “Analisis Hukum Ekonomi Syariah Terhadap Penyelesaian Pembiayaan Bermasalah di Perbankan Syariah.” Jurnal Perspektif 2, no. 2 (2019): 215–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.15575/jp.v2i2.30.
Yahman. Cara Mudah Memahami Wanprestasi dan Penipuan dalam Hubungan Kontrak Komersial. Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group, 2019.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright
Copyright (c) 2025 by the Auhtor(s) Published by Development Centre Research of Law and Scientific Publication on behalf of the Faculty of Law, Universitas Lampung
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.






