Barriers to The Execution of Seizure of Execution against Court Decisions That Have Permanent Legal Force (Example is The Case of Confiscation of Execution of Assets of Perumda Salatiga)

Nadia Darmasita Paramithasari

doi:10.47191/ijsshr/v4-i12-41

Abstract

This research aim to determine the regional finance management arrangements for the assets of regional public company originating from separated regional assets and the constraints in the execution of assets of Perumda BPR Bank Salatiga. This research uses normative research. The research was conducted by library research using secondary data, while the tool used was document study. The data that has been collected is analyzed qualitatively. The results of this study indicate that the Regional Financial Management of Regional Public Company (Perumda) assets is the authority and responsibility of the Regional Government represented by the Regional Head who is the owner of capital as well as the owner of Perumda and Barriers in the execution of the seizure of the assets of Perumda BPR Bank Salatiga because there is Article 50 of Law No. 1 of 2014 concerning the State Treasury which prohibits the execution of assets belonging to the region.

Highlights

The economic activities of a country are driven by the population residing in the country, but are carried out by the country/government of that country
The results of this study indicate that the Regional Financial Management of Regional Public Company (Perumda) assets is the authority and responsibility of the Regional Government represented by the Regional Head who is the owner of capital as well as the owner of Perumda and Barriers in the execution of the seizure of the assets of Perumda BPR Bank Salatiga because there is Article 50 of Law No 1 of 2014 concerning the State Treasury which prohibits the execution of assets belonging to the region
Perumda BPR Bank Salatiga cannot fulfill its rights and obligations as an institution that carries out banking activities, namely not returning customer funds and instead choosing to ignore even Perumda BPR Bank Salatiga looks arrogant because it feels its position is strong because Perumda BPR Bank Salatiga as a Regional Public Company whose capital is to all of which are separated regional assets owned by the regions, the assets cannot be confiscated because the assets belong to the regions

Summary

INTRODUCTION

The economic activities of a country are driven by the population residing in the country, but are carried out by the country/government of that country. The establishment of BUMD is expected to provide benefits to the regional economy, organize public benefits in the form of providing goods and/or services that are quality for fulfilling the needs of the community according to the conditions, characteristics and potential of the area concerned based on good corporate governance, and obtaining profits and/or profits as regulated in Article 7 PP No 54 of 2017 concerning Regional Owned Enterprises (BUMD). Perumda BPR Bank Salatiga cannot fulfill its rights and obligations as an institution that carries out banking activities, namely not returning customer funds and instead choosing to ignore even Perumda BPR Bank Salatiga looks arrogant because it feels its position is strong because Perumda BPR Bank Salatiga as a Regional Public Company whose capital is to all of which are separated regional assets owned by the regions, the assets cannot be confiscated because the assets belong to the regions This is because the state invests capital (derived from the APBD) in Perumda. Based on the explanation above, the question that arises is how to regulate the wealth of Regional Public Companies as a form of separated state assets? How are regional financial management arrangements for Perumda assets originating from separated regional assets and what are the obstacles in the implementation of the confiscation of assets for Perumda BPR Bank Salatiga?

RESEARCH METHOD

DISCUSSION

Conclusion