Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search
Journal : Sibatik Journal : Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Sosial, Ekonomi, Budaya, Teknologi, Dan Pendidikan

PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN NOTARIS YANG MENERBITKAN AKTA BERISI KETERANGAN PALSU (STUDI KASUS PERKARA NOMOR 1362/PID.B/2019/PN.JKT.UTR) Bella Annisa Ardhani; Busyra Azheri
SIBATIK JOURNAL: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Sosial, Ekonomi, Budaya, Teknologi, dan Pendidikan Vol. 2 No. 5 (2023): April
Publisher : Lafadz Jaya Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54443/sibatik.v2i5.808

Abstract

A notary is a public official authorized to make authentic deeds. This authority must be carried out in accordance with the regulations stipulated in the Notary Office Act and not violate the Notary Code of Ethics. However, not a few notaries carry out their duties in accordance with the established regulations, resulting in a party being harmed and the notary being held accountable. This happened in the Decision on Criminal Case Number 1362/Pid.B/2019/Pn.Jkt.Utr. In this decision, notary R forged an authentic deed because he entered information that was not in accordance with the facts and also did not read and sign the deed he made in front of the parties. Therefore, this thesis takes the title Liability of a Notary Who Issues Deeds Containing False Statements (Case Study Case Number 1362/Pid.B/2019/PN.Jkt.Utr). The formulation of the problem in this research is: 1) What are the legal considerations of the judges in deciding case number 1362/Pid.B/2019/PN.Jkt.Utr? 2) What is the responsibility of the notary for the deed he made based on case number 1362/Pid.B/2019/PN.Jkt.Utr? This study uses normative juridical legal research methods, namely the systematic compilation of data, assessment, then concludes on the relationship to the problems studied with the statutory approach. The results of this study are: 1) The basis for the judge's consideration in decision number 1362/Pid.B/2019/PN.Jkt.Utr comes from juridical and non-juridical and grants the indictment of the public prosecutor in accordance with the provisions violated by notary R but the judge does not make the existence of peace into the lightening thing. 2) The responsibility imposed on notary R is administrative sanctions, namely temporary dismissal due to being in custody then the main sanction is imprisonment for 1 (one) year and 8 (eight) months.
KEABSAHAN TANDA TANGAN ELEKTRONIK PADA AKTA NOTARIS Jenny Divia Fitcanisa; Busyra Azheri
SIBATIK JOURNAL: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Sosial, Ekonomi, Budaya, Teknologi, dan Pendidikan Vol. 2 No. 5 (2023): April
Publisher : Lafadz Jaya Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54443/sibatik.v2i5.809

Abstract

The development of information and electronic technology, which is currently increasing rapidly, has an impact on the Notary's work related to the signing of the Notary deed. The cyber notary concept contained in Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning Amendments to Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Position of Notary (hereinafter referred to as UUJN) in the elucidation of Article 15 paragraph (3) states that there are other powers for a Notary, namely the authority to certify transactions carried out electronically (cyber notary) but in the absence of regulations regarding this matter it seems to be an obstacle to the implementation of electronic signing. Based on this, the authors formulate the problem, namely, first how to regulate norms regarding electronic signatures on notarial deeds, Second, how are the requirements for an electronic signature on a notary deed to be considered legally valid. This study uses a juridical-normative approach. The results of this research study indicate that the regulation of Cyber notary has not been regulated in Indonesia so because there is no regulation regarding the electronic signing of the notary deed, the notary cannot carry out the signing of the deed electronically under any circumstances. The legal requirements relating to the electronic signature do not meet the requirements for a valid signature on a notary deed because according to Article 16 UUJN it requires the signature to be carried out directly by the appearer or the parties before the notary.