Abstract
This research departs from the large number of application data submitted to the Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi, MK) regarding Article 66 paragraph (1) of Law no. 30 of 2004 on the Position of Notary and its amendments by Law no. 2 of 2014 (Undang-Undang Jabtasn Notaris, UUJN). At least since UUJN was promulgated, there have been 4 MK decisions related to this article, and the most recent is PMK No.16/PUU-XVII/2020. Application regarding Article 66 paragraph (1) UUJN regarding the phrase "...with the approval of the Notary Honorary Council". Hence the position of a notary seem to need redefinition considering this particular article is ceaselessly appealed to the Constitutional Court with an unconstitutional argument (i.e. it fails to fulfill the principle of equality before the law). Therefore, the formulation of the problems studied are: first, what is the authority of the Honorary Council of Notaries regarding the granting of approval in the judicial process for Notaries?; and second, is Article 66 paragraph (1) UUJN contradicting the principle of equality before the law? This is a normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches. The results of this study conclude that the first notary summoned by the investigator must obtain approval from the Honorary Council of Notaries to be summoned and examined before the investigator; and secondly Article 66 paragraph (1) UUJN is not a form of conflict with the principle of equality before the law.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call