The Responsibility of the Curator for Settlement of Bankruptcy Boedel if Enforced by Criminal Confiscation

Abstract

General confiscation applies at the time the bankruptcy decision is passed, this matter also causes the entire confiscation of the assets of the bankrupt debtor to be written off. However, in practice in Indonesia there are still various kinds of seizures that can still be imposed on debtor's assets other than general confiscation, such as civil confiscation, criminal confiscation, or tax confiscation. The problem is how to regulate and implement the bankruptcy seizure in” Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and PKPU” and what is the responsibility of the curator in resolving the bankruptcy boedel when charged with criminal seizure. This research aims to examine these problems using normative juridical research methods. The data used is secondary data obtained through library research. Based on the research results, it is known that the position of general confiscation is greater than that of other confiscations. Then, the authority and responsibility of the curator in criminal confiscation of bankruptcy assets can still be exercised, even though the verdict is filed for cassation and review. Due to the legal consequences of the bankruptcy bill which was confiscated by the investigator, until the criminal confiscation took precedence after that after the end of the verification, the bankruptcy bill was returned to the curator.