Abstract
The establishment of the Bankruptcy Law aims to overcome the difficulties of the business world in terms of debt and receivables in continuing their activities. However, in practice the PKPU and Bankruptcy institutions are used as a means of resolving ordinary civil disputes, this is due to Article 225 paragraph (3) and (5) in conjunction with Article 222 paragraph (1) and (2). The purpose of this study is to analyze the ratio legis for debtors in relation to the ratio legis Article 225 paragraph (3) and paragraph (5) associated with the purpose of establishing Bankruptcy and Suspension Of Debt Payment Obligations (UUK-PKPU). This research is normative legal research with a statute approach, the case approach, historical approach, comparative approach, and the conceptual approach. The legal materials used are primary, secondary, and tertiary. The analysis technique uses legal logic, legal interpretation teleologically, hermeneutics, grammatically, and systematically. The results of the study indicate that the ratio legis regarding PKPU as regulated in Article 225 paragraph (3) and paragraph (5) has a vague norm when it comes to the purpose of establishing UUK-PKPU, that PKPU is a means for debtors so that debtors can restructure their debts. So that no rights are given to debtors who are not present at the PKPU session resulting in no legal protection for the debtor to defend himself by conveying the reasons for the debtor's absence.
Highlights
The meaning of legal protection is interpreted by Paton as an interest which is the object of a right, because it is protected by law, and because there is recognition of it
The Bankruptcy Law and SDPO are a phase of change from the bankruptcy provisions and suspension of debt payment obligations existed in Indonesia
There is no principle of debt forgiveness in the new bankruptcy law, which is detrimental to the interests of the Debtor because it turns out that the settlement through this bankruptcy institution is not a complete settlement, it means when the Debtor does not have assets to pay off these debts
Summary
The meaning of legal protection is interpreted by Paton as an interest which is the object of a right, because it is protected by law, and because there is recognition of it. In the absence of restrictions on the amount of debt in bankruptcy (Article 2 of Law No 34 of 2004) and Applications for Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) (Article 222 of Law No 34 of 2004) both submitted by the Debtor and Creditor must be granted by the Court can obscure the purpose of the establishment of the Law on Bankruptcy and PKPU, because judges are required to grant PKPU requests submitted by both Creditors and Debtors without providing an assessment of whether the problem submitted is a bankruptcy issue or can be filed in the realm of ordinary civil lawsuits. The legal hermeneutic method is used to analyze, look for the truth which is essentially based on the principles (Aprilia et al, 2018) of Law Number 37 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations, especially based on the concept of ratio legis from Article 225 paragraph (3) and paragraph (5) UUK-PKPU
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
