Fiduciary Registration Office Research Articles

Legal Protection of Debtors for Fiduciary Collateral Objects Whose Debts Have Been Paid Off Based on the Fiduciary Guarantee Law and Government Regulation Number 21 of 2015

Fiduciary Guarantee is an accessory agreement that follows the principal agreement it guarantees. If the principal agreement ends, the Fiduciary Guarantee agreement also ends. However, the recording of the encumbrance and granting of the Fiduciary Guarantee contained in the Fiduciary Guarantee Register Book at the Fiduciary Registration Office can be crossed out or deleted (roya) if requested by the Fiduciary Beneficiary (Article 25 paragraph (3) of Law No. 42/1999 on Fiduciary Guarantee). Legal protection is provided in the event of full repayment or repayment of the debt secured by the Fiduciary Guarantee Object. Based on Article 25 paragraph (1) of Law No. 42/1999, this is one of the reasons for fiduciary abolition. The Fiduciary is obliged to notify the abolition of the Fiduciary Guarantee to the Fiduciary Registration Office so that the Fiduciary Guarantee can be removed from the Fiduciary Guarantee Register Book. The nature of the Fiduciary Guarantee depends on the existence of the receivables whose repayment is guaranteed. If the receivables are written off due to debt repayment or disposal, the related Fiduciary Guarantee is automatically deleted. If the Creditor does not perform the deletion, the Debtor may take legal action, either through litigation or non-litigation. An obstacle to legal protection for the Fiduciary is if the Fiduciary does not complete the Fiduciary Guarantee Certificate online. Law No. 42/1999 and its implementing regulation, PP No. 21/2015, do not include sanctions for the Fiduciary or its representative if the Fiduciary Guarantee Certificate is not done. This results in no legal certainty over the object of the Fiduciary Guarantee if the Fiduciary does not perform it, because the object used as collateral remains registered with the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and the Fiduciary Guarantee Certificate is still considered valid and cannot be re-registered in accordance with Article 17 paragraph (2) of Government Regulation No. 21 of 2015.

LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF NOT REMOVING REGISTERED FIDUCIARY GUARANTEES FROM THE ONLINE SYSTEM IN BALI

Fiduciary guarantees are material guarantees that are most widely used by banks. Fiduciary guarantees have been used by the Indonesian people since the Dutch colonial era. Based on the Circular Letter of the Directorate General of AHU Number AHU-06.OT.03.01 of 2013 concerning the Implementation of the Electronic Fiduciary Registration Administration System, registration of Fiduciary guarantees is no longer carried out at the Fiduciary registration office but is registered on the official website, namely https://Fidusia.ahu .go.id The implementation of the elimination of Fiduciary guarantees registered in the online system is the obligation of the Fiduciary recipients, but in practice there are still Fiduciary recipients who do not fulfill their obligations to notify the removal of Fiduciary guarantees after the Fiduciary giver pays off their debts. There is no sanction that regulates if the Fiduciary recipient does not notify the cancellation of the Fiduciary guarantee which results in this obligation being not adhered to. The method used is the method of writing empirical law. The results that can be concluded in this study are that if the Fiduciary recipient does not notify the deletion of the Fiduciary guarantee, then the Fiduciary guarantee concerned cannot be re-registered.

Use of Debt Collector Services by Banking Parties Based on the Fiduciary Guarantee Law

This research aims to analyze the role and impact of the use of debt collectors in the context of collecting collections by banking institutions that take credit based on fiduciary guarantees. This research is also to teach debt collector practices with applicable legal provisions and the impact on the rights and obligations of the parties involved. There are many cases of motor vehicle withdrawals that have credit problems but do not follow existing laws. In distributing funds by providing credit to the public using fiduciary guarantees, Law no. 42 of 1999 requires transaction registration at the Fiduciary Registration Office. This process produces a fiduciary guarantee certificate which has executorial power equivalent to a judge's decision which has permanent legal force. However, in reality, there is a phenomenon where the fiduciary recipient takes the collateral if the fiduciary does not fulfill his obligations. In executing fiduciary guarantees, it is still common to use the services of debt collectors.

Tinjauan Yuridis Terhadap Obyek Jaminan Fidusia yang Digadaikan Tanpa Persetujuan Penerima Fidusia (Studi Kasus di PT. Sinarmas Multifinance Cabang Jember)

This research examines the juridical review of fiduciary collateral objects pledged without the consent of the fiduciary recipient. The aim of this research is to analyze the juridical review of fiduciary collateral objects pledged without the consent of the fiduciary recipient. The research method used is the statutory approach method (statue approach) and the case approach method. The type of research is normative juridical, meaning that the problems raised, discussed and described in this research are prioritized by applying positive rules or norms. The research results reveal that in practice we encounter many cases with obstacles in the field. Firstly, this is because many fiduciary recipients still do not register fiduciary collateral objects. Second, fiduciary parties can still be found who violate the agreed provisions. Even though the object of the fiduciary guarantee has been registered, there are still fiduciary providers who pledge the object of the fiduciary guarantee. The form of formal legal protection that can be done is by registering the object of fiduciary collateral with the fiduciary registration office. The second step is to provide a clause to provide sanctions against the party giving the fiduciary.

Implikasi Hukum dan Kekuatan Pembuktian Akta Jaminan Fidusia yang Penandatanganannya Tidak Dilakukan di Hadapan Notaris

Notaries must sign the deed in front of the parties and witnesses, but in practice this signing is often not done in front of the parties and witnesses, giving rise to legal implications. This research discusses the legal implications of signing a deed that is not carried out in the presence of a notary and the evidentiary strength of a fiduciary guarantee deed whose signing is not carried out in the presence of a notary. The research method used is normative research, using a statutory approach and a conceptual approach, using secondary data which will be analyzed using descriptive analysis. The results of this research are that the legal implications of signing a deed that is not done in the presence of a notary means that the deed will turn into a private deed. Therefore, if the fiduciary guarantee deed is made privately, it does not fulfill the provisions of Article 5 paragraph (1) UUJF, so the deed becomes invalid and cannot be registered at the Fiduciary Registration Office and the evidentiary power of the fiduciary guarantee deed whose signing is not carried out in before a notary, making the deed only have the power of proof of a private deed, a private deed only has the power of formal proof, namely if the signature on the deed is acknowledged (in this case it is proof of recognition) which means the statement stated in the deed recognized and justified.

TINJAUAN YURIDIS PELAKSANAAN PEMBEBANAN FIDUSIA DENGAN SURAT KUASA JAMINAN FIDUSIA DIBAWAH TANGAN MENURUT UU No. 42 TAHUN 1999 DI PT BPR ARTHA TANAH MAS SEMARANG

The process of creating a fiduciary guarantee is carried out through the imposition stage which is carried out before a notary and the fiduciary guarantee registration stage. In practice, currently there is widespread use of power of attorney to charge fiduciaries under the hand to make fiduciary deeds before a notary. The problem in this study is how the process of implementing fiduciary imposition with a private power of attorney for fiduciary guarantees according to Law no. 42 of 1999 at PT BPR Artha Tanah Mas Semarang and how is the legal force of the fiduciary deed made through a power of attorney under the fiduciary guarantee. The approach method is empirical juridical, descriptive analytical research specifications, data sources are primary data and secondary data. Data collection methods are field studies and literature studies, data analysis is qualitative. The results of the study show that the process of implementing fiduciary imposition with a power of attorney for fiduciary guarantees is underhand according to Law no. 42 of 1999 at PT BPR Artha Tanah Mas Semarang, the debtor signs a power of attorney for fiduciary guarantees, then the bank faces itself before the notary to make a fiduciary guarantee deed for further registration at the Fiduciary Registration Office. The fiduciary deed made through a power of attorney under the hand of fiduciary guarantees is basically valid, but if there is a lawsuit or intervention from another party, the power of attorney under the hand of fiduciary has weaknesses in the verification process, where the position of the power of attorney under the hand is very weak and lacks legal certainty.

Dinamika Pembebanan Jaminan Fidusia Terkait Dengan Prinsip Spesialitas

The principle of specializing fiduciary guarantees in consumer financing agreements is one of the principles that must be fulfilled, in order to provide legal certainty to both fiduciary recipients and fiduciary recipients, particularly regarding the right to ownership of collateral. If the consumer financing agreement is not fulfilled by the principle of specialization, then there is no legal certainty in the agreement. Every object that is burdened with a fiduciary guarantee must be registered at the fiduciary registration office for the birth of the fiduciary guarantee. A new fiduciary guarantee is said to be born if it has been registered so that a fiduciary certificate is issued which has executive power if in the future the debtor defaults. So that the creditor in the settlement of default is not based on a power of attorney but based on a fiduciary certificate which has the same strength as a court decision that has permanent legal force. The methodology used in this study is the normative juridical methodology and the approach used is a conceptual approach and a statutory approach. The thinking framework used is descriptive method in this study.
 KEYWORDS: Principle, Specialization, Fiduciary

Legal Implications of Not Performing Roya Fiduciary Guarantee by the Creditor

The purpose of this research is to find out and analyze the obstacles of the creditor not doing roya fiduciary when the debtor's debt is paid off, legal protection to the debtor if the creditor does not do roya fiduciary guarantee and the legal implications of not doing roya fiduciary at PT Verena Multi Finance Medan City. This type of research is normative juridical legal research, the nature of the research is descriptive analysis, the techniques used are library research and field research. The results of the study state that the obstacles of creditors in carrying out fiduciary security roya are constraints on the removal system and constraints on legal arrangements. Legal protection to the debtor if the creditor does not make a fiduciary guarantee roya is stated in Article 25 paragraph (3) of the Fiduciary Guarantee Law that upon the abolition of the fiduciary guarantee the fiduciary recipient notifies the Fiduciary Registration Office of the abolition of the fiduciary guarantee by attaching a statement regarding the abolition of debt. The legal implication of not doing fiduciary roya at PT Verena Multi Finance Medan City is that the object of fiduciary guarantee that has not been royaed cannot be used as collateral if the object of the guarantee is to be re-guaranteed as an object of fiduciary guarantee, then the object must be royaed first.

Fiduciary Collateral Object Execution Mechanism Post Constitutional Court Decision Number 2/PUU-XIX/2021

Fiduciary guarantees have existed in society since the Dutch colonial era because of the flexibility of objects that can be burdened with fiduciary guarantees, the more there is a need for legal certainty over fiduciary guarantees. The Fiduciary Guarantee Act (UUJF) requires registration of the imposition of fiduciary guarantees. Registration is carried out at the Fiduciary Registration Office with a working area covering the entire territory of the Republic of Indonesia and is within the scope of duties of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights to obtain a fiduciary guarantee certificate. The fiduciary guarantee certificate contains the head of the decision which is interpreted as having the power of execution, so that the execution can be carried out immediately without going through a court and is final as described in Article 15 paragraph (2). In practice, this article often becomes a polemic in the community, causing acts against the law and even criminal acts when the fiduciary recipient wants to execute the fiduciary guarantee. After the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 2/PUU-XIX/2021, in its decision, it redefines Article 15 paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) of the UUJF. This decision is an explanation and confirmation of the previous Constitutional Court Decision Number 18 /PUU-XVII/2019. This study will discuss the power of administering fiduciary guarantees after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 2/PUU-XIX/2021. With the research method using a statutory (normative) approach, as well as a conceptual approach, it is concluded that the execution clause in the fiduciary guarantee certificate does not change, only as a legal consequence arising from the decision of the Constitutional Court number 2/PUU-XIX/2021, namely the mechanism for implementing the guarantee certificate execution. Fiduciary is carried out by equating it with the mechanism for implementing the execution of a court decision that has permanent legal force (incracht), if the guarantor does not voluntarily surrender the object of the fiduciary guarantee under his control. In addition, there must be an agreement between the parties regarding the default. And in the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 2/PUU-XIX/2021 as an explanation and confirming the multiple interpretations in the public of the previous Constitutional Court decision, that the execution of a fiduciary guarantee certificate through a court decision is an alternative that can be taken in the event that there is no agreement between the creditor and the the debtor, both in relation to default and the voluntary surrender of the object of guarantee from the debtor to the creditor. The default clause must be specified in the principal agreement or in the fiduciary guarantee certificate.

The Urgency of Strengthening Creditor Legal Protection in Fiduciary Guarantee Agreements

In a fiduciary guarantee agreement, both the fiduciary recipient and the fiduciary giver according to the fiduciary guarantee law are equally given legal protection. However, there are still weaknesses in legal protection for creditors, exacerbated by the practice of implementing fiduciary agreements in the field, among others in the form of not registering fiduciary objects (only stopping at making authentic deeds). Then, in the practice that occurs, the financial institution in entering into a financing agreement includes the words fiduciary guarantee. However, ironically, it is not made in a notarial deed and is not registered at the Fiduciary Registration Office to obtain a certificate. So, it is not surprising that due to such practice, cases of slow and difficult execution of fiduciaries are a problem. This research is to answer the question: the urgency of implementing strengthening legal protection for creditors in fiduciary guarantee agreements? To answer this problem, the author conducted normative legal research by looking at sociological conditions that occurred or were based on field facts. The results of this study indicate that a fiduciary guarantee that must be made with a Notary Deed, can provide legal protection if the process and procedures are following Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantee, and Fiduciary Guarantee was born since it was registered. In addition, in the practice of administering fiduciary guarantee agreements in Indonesia, legal protection efforts for creditors have not been fully implemented for fiduciary guarantee agreements. This is due to the juridical and non-juridical inhibiting factors in the form of inconsistencies between the mandates contained in the legal basis of fiduciary guarantees and the practices of their organizers.
 Keywords: legal protection, creditors, fiduciary guarantee

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP DEBITUR DALAM PENARIKAN SITA JAMINAN FIDUSIA TANPA MELALUI LELANG PENGADILAN

Debtors as legal subjects are entitled to legal protection, both preventive and repressive, written or unwritten. The legal protection provided is an implementation of the principle of recognition and dignity that is rooted in Pancasila and the Constitution. This study aims to analyze the protection and legal remedies of the debtor in withdrawing the confiscation of fiduciary guarantees without going through a court auction. This research is a normative legal research. The results of this study include: The debtor's legal effort in withdrawing a fiduciary guarantee without going through a court auction is to ask the creditor to show a Fiduciary Guarantee Certificate issued by the Fiduciary Registration Office. If the creditor cannot show a fiduciary guarantee certificate, then the debtor does not need to submit the collateral, because the creditor does not have the right to execute the collateral.

Legal Consequences of Fiduciary Registration Over Time

The needs and desperateness of the community in its economy make the transaction also buy goods with the object of buying and selling vehicles that are used as objects of fiduciary guarantee. Vehicle / object of fiduciary guarantee in can be credited to the financing/ leasing institution with payment in installments. Against guarantees for repayment of the financing is charged guaranteed in a fiduciary. In practice the transfer of the fiduciary guarantee without being known by the financing institution. Even though the transfer or sale and purchase of the fiduciary guarantee object must be registered in advance to the Fiduciary Registration Office. This resulted in the emergence of cases that can be punished debtor. The problem is how the legal consequences for debtors who sell fiduciary guarantees with late registration and how tosettle against creditors who sell the fiduciary guarantee. The approach method used is the empirical juridical approach, the research is analytically descriptive, the approach is used to analyze qualitatively. Regarding the legal consequences of transferring fiduciary guarantee objects that are transferred or sold to another party. The right of creditors to get repayment on the loans granted is not lost even if it results from the invalidity of the fiduciary guarantee certificate, but results in creditors no longer having preferent rights. Law Enforcement through the means of criminal law is delayed, so there is no discussion, whether in this case there is a criminal act in the form of diverting, pawning or renting goods that become objects that become fiduciary guarantees without the permission of fiduciary recipients as referred to in Article 23 Jo Article 36 of Ri Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantee allegedly carried out by WARMO Bin (alm) CARWANbrothers.

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM KONSUMEN TERHADAP PENARIKAN DAN PENYITAAN OBJEK JAMINAN FIDUCIA YANG TIDAK DIDAFTARKAN KREDITUR

The facts on the ground are that there are often problems due to legal consequences due to the non-registration of fiduciary guarantees by financial institutions. This study aims to determine consumer legal protection measures when fiduciary collateral is not registered at the Fiduciary Registration Office. This study also aims to examine the legal consequences of the withdrawal and confiscation of fiduciary collateral objects that are not registered at the Fiducia Registration Office by PT. Suzuki Finance Indonesia. This study uses a normative juridical method with descriptive-analytical research specifications through a statutory approach. Based on this study, it is concluded that consumer dispute resolution can be pursued through the court or outside the court based on the decision of the disputing parties. One of the legal protections and obligations in using fiduciary guarantees for finance companies was the first issuance of PP No.21 of 2015, Permenkeu No. 130 / PMK.010 / 2012, and POJK 29/2014. The legal consequence of not registering the object of the fiduciary guarantee is that the fiduciary guarantee has not been born so that the legal consequences attached to the fiduciary guarantee do not apply.

PENDAFTARAN JAMINAN FIDUSIA SEBAGAI PEMENUHAN ASAS PUBLISITAS

Before the birth of the Fiduciary Guarantee Law (UUJF), the issue of fiduciary security registration was not an obligation, but with the birth of the UUJF, registration of fiduciary guarantees was a very crucial stage and had an impact on many aspects of the following law. Such explanation is also recognized in the General Elucidation of UUJF that one of the reasons fiduciary guarantees does not provide legal certainty, especially to fiduciary recipients, one of which is because the fiduciary guarantee is not registered. The fulfillment of the principle of publicity in fiduciary security is carried out by registering fiduciary security at the Fiduciary Registration Office. Regarding the request, the registration office will record the guarantee in the Fiduciary Register Book and will issue a Fiduciary Guarantee Certificate which has the order for Justice Based on Almighty God. The normalization of fiduciary security registration in UUJF is a legal norm that is compelling (dwingend recht). This can be seen through two aspects, namely the use of the word mandatory in UUJF as a command norm, and from the aspect of the legal principle of objects which are closed, so that the norm cannot be deviated. With regard to fiduciary security that is not registered, the creditor as the recipient of fiduciary does not receive the rights and benefits specified in the UUJF, including material rights, priority rights, executive rights, and application of criminal provisions.

Dampak Jaminan Fidusia Kredit Kendaraan Bermotor yang Tidak Didaftarkan terhadap Penerimaan Negara Bukan Pajak

Motor vehicles ownership through finance companies can be realized after going through a series of procedures before a notary and fiduciary registration office. However, this series of procedures are not done by finance companies in providing motor vehicle financing to consumers. Increasing consumer financing to the public for motor vehicles ownership should also increase the number of non-tax state revenues from fiduciary guarantees. The study purpose is to know the legal consequences for fiduciary recipients who did not register their fiduciary guarantees and to know the impact of unregistered fiduciary guarantees on non-tax state revenue (PNBP). The formulation of the problem in the research question is how the legal consequences for fiduciary recipients who do not register their fiduciary guarantees and how the impact of unregistered fiduciary guarantees on non-tax state revenue (PNBP). The research method used is descriptive qualitative normative legal research using secondary data. The study results found that fiduciary finance companies/ recipients did not register their fiduciary guarantee, so they committed illegal acts by utilizing third parties to execute motorized vehicles that were not actually burdened with fiduciary guarantees. The executor’s right to fiduciary recipient is legally flawed because he does not hold a fiduciary guarantee certificate as a result of not registering a motorized vehicle as a fiduciary guarantee. The impact on state finances because they were not registering motor vehicles as fiduciary guarantees at the fiduciary registration office resulting in non-tax revenue (PNBP) being not optimal for the state.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS TO FIDUSIAN OBJECT WARRANTIES THAT HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED (ROYA) AND RE-REGISTERED ON THE FIDUSIAN ONLINE APPLICATION

In Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Security, it is stipulated that fiduciary security must be registered. Based on the Circular of the Directorate General of General Legal Administration No. AHU-06.OT.03.01 Year 2013 concerning the Enforcement of the Fiduciary Security Registration Administration System electronically (online), the registration process is no longer done manually. In Article 25 of Law Number 42 Year 1999 it is stipulated that after the debt from the fiduciary has been paid, there must be a report regarding the termination of the fiduciary guarantee. Lack of public awareness, especially fiduciary recipients, their proxies or representatives to apply for removal of fiduciary security objects that have ended at the Fiduciary Registration Office, henceforth, it is written off in the ONLINE Fiduciary Register Book which is mandated by the Fiduciary Security Law which may affect the administration of registration of the object of guarantee. This is important to avoid being re-imposed on objects of collateral that are still registered and also to protect the interests of the new creditors. The problems that arise areLegal Implications for Fiduciary Object Collateral That Has Not Been Deleted (Roya) And Re-registered In The ONLINE Fiduciary Application.From the results of the research that has been carried out, it is found that the legal certainty of fiduciary guarantees that registration is not deleted (roya) is in Article 25 of Law Number 42 of 1999 where the fiduciary recipient notifies the abolition of fiduciary guarantees to the Fiduciary Registration Office, this is added with Article 17 Government Regulation Number 21 of 2015 concerning Fiduciary Security Registration Procedures and Fees for Fiduciary Security Deed with a ban on re-fiduciary action. However, the lack of awareness of fiduciary recipients, proxies, or representatives and the absence of strict sanctions regarding the obligation to write off registration (roya) are obstacles in guaranteeing legal certainty for fiduciary security.Deletion of registration (roya) becomes legal protection for parties both juridically and administratively and provides certainty for the object that is guaranteed.

Strength of Fiduciary Deed in the Implementation of Bad Credit Execution by Financial Institutions

As a result of a Fiduciary Guarantee that is not made a fiduciary certificate or in authentic form before a Notary Public, the Fiduciary Guarantee object has no immediate execution rights. When there is default or congestion from the consumer, the financial institution cannot execute the object of the guarantee. Financial institutions actually execute unilaterally without going through relevant government agencies and based on applicable laws. The making of a fiduciary deed by a notary is carried out through two stages in accordance with Law Number 42 of 1999 Concerning fiduciary guarantees, namely through the stages of loading and registration. Charges with fiduciary guarantees are made with a notarial deed, the notary is required to make a fiduciary guarantee deed by taking into account the procedure for loading, loading fees and the period of loading. After the fiduciary guarantee deed has been signed by the parties concerned, after that the registration of the fiduciary deed will be registered at the fiduciary registration office. As a result, the strength of the fiduciary deed made by a notary setting the position of the fiduciary deed and the role of the notary in making fiduciary deed. 1) Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantee states that the person authorized to make a Fiduciary Deed is a notary, while Article 17 of Law Number 2 of 2014 amendments to Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning Notary Position stipulates that the Notary Public is only authorized to make an authentic deed in the jurisdiction or jurisdiction.Obstacles in the settlement of bad debts, namely the existence of resistance by the debtor against the execution auction plan that does not have a clear legal basis, because it is only based on unilateral recognition without proof or acknowledgment from the Debtor. Because legally the position of the debtor as the creditor holding the Fiduciary Guarantee is already strong, because all the guarantee documents are notarized and based on the law, the document is an authentic deed that has perfect proofing power before the judge.

Improving The Object Of Fiduciary Guarantee According To Law Number 42 Of 1999 On Fiduciary Guarantee

Fiduciary is the transfer of ownership rights of an object based on trust, where ownership right of the object is transferred remains under the control of the owner of the object. The subject of the research was how to bind the object of fiduciary guarantee according to Law Number 42 of 1999 on fiduciary? What are the consequences if the binding of fiduciary guarantee object is unfulfilled? This research was normative legal research which means that the objects are secondary data on library. The type of the research was descriptive. It can be concluded that the binding of fiduciary guarantee object according to Law Number 42 of 1999 on fiduciary guarantee is certificate of fiduciary guarantee as an evidence which is an authentic deed. It can be seen from the characteristics of certificate fiduciary guarantee, issued by an authorized official or public official who has authority for issuing certificate fiduciary guarantee in Fiduciary Registration Office under the supervision of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights. The consequences (the binding of fiduciary guarantee object is unfulfilled) are the default causes several legal consequences for debtors and creditors, especially for creditors who must loss. While for debtors, the legal consequence is the existence of a new status for which the debtor must responsible of. Fiduciary guarantee, mostly in form of movable objects, allows for a transfer of fiduciary guarantee; one example of the reason for the transfer is the debtor wants to transfer his credit to another creditor to seek for lower interest. Then, if a debtor has paid off the debt, it can cause the fiduciary guarantee to be canceled.

PELAKSANAAN TUGAS KANTOR PENDAFTARAN FIDUSIA TERHADAP PEMBERLAKUAN SISTEM ADMINISTRASI PENDAFTARAN JAMINAN FIDUSIA SECARA ELEKTRONIK DI PROVINSI DAERAH ISTIMEWA YOGYAKARTA

All activities related to registration of Fiduciary Transfer of Ownership formerly done in Fiduciary Registration Office. Then to improve service of Fiduciary Transfer of Ownership registration easily and quickly. This legal research aims to know how task execution of fiduciary registration office to the implementation of the administrative system fiduciary transfer of ownership registration electronically (online system) in the Provinces of a Special Region Yogyakarta. This legal research uses empirical research method with primary data and secondary data. The process of thinking is deductive. The conclusion in this legal research is Fiduciary Registration Office has a task that already executed by accordingly with legislation, but there is a task that not yet executed well which is checking authority list of sburdened objects with Fiduciary Transfer of Ownership electonically.Keywords: fiduciary; fiduciary registration office; electonic fiduciaryAbstrakSemua kegiatan yang berkaitan dengan pendaftaran jaminan fidusia dahulu dilakukan melalui Kantor Pendaftaran Fidusia.Kemudian untuk meningkatkan pelayanan pendaftaran jaminan fidusia dengan mudah dan cepat. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui bagaimana peran Kantor Pendaftaran Fidusia terhadap pemberlakuan sistem administrasi pendaftaran jaminan fidusia secara elektronik (online system) di Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta.Penelitian hukum ini menggunakan metode penelitian empiris dengan sumber data primer dan data sekunder. Proses berpikir yang akan digunakan yaitu proses berpikir secara deduktif. Kesimpulan dalam penulisan hukum ini adalah Kantor Pendaftaran Fidusia memiliki peran yang sudah sesuai dengan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku, namun ada peran yang belum sesuai yaitu mengenai kewenangan pengecekan daftar obyek yang dibebani jaminan fidusia secara elektronik.Kata kunci: fidusia; kantor pendaftaran fidusia; fidusia online

KONSEP FIDUSCIAIRE EIGENDOMS OVERDRACHT DALAM KAJIAN FIQH MUAMALAH

In Civil Law, a fiduciary guarantee is an agreement whereby the debtor binds its agreement to the creditor for the debt payable which makes proof of ownership of an object to be used as collateral for its debt. The agreement that occurs in a fiduciary guarantee called the accession agreement (additional agreement) is not the principal agreement of a loan agreement, to fulfill the achievements among the parties; the fiduciary guarantee must be registered with the fiduciary Registration Office. Whereas the fiduciary concept in Muamalah Fiqh according to the General Provisions of Fatwa DSN-MUI No. 68 / DSN-MUI / III / 2008 About Rahn Tasjily Fidusia is analogous to Rahn Tasjily. The concept of rahn tasjîly the râhin party binds the agreement to the murtahin, which is called the rahn tasjîly agreement by using a debt debt agreement accompanied by a collateral / guarantee in the form of evidence of ownership submitted to the murtahin. This means that the agreement contained in rahn tasjîly is an agreement that is accesoir because collateral in a debt in rahn tasjîly is an additional agreement. The difference between fiduciary guarantees and rahn tasjîly can be seen in terms of maintaining objects. In a fiduciary guarantee, the maintenance of objects that are used as collateral for debt is the obligation of the creditor but the maintenance costs are the responsibility of the debtor. Whereas in rahn tasjîly the maintenance of objects that are used as collateral for debt is not only the obligation of rahin, but can also be carried out by murtahin, while the equality can be seen from various aspects both in terms of definition, object, form of agreement, termination of agreement, and manner of execution goods. One of them is in terms of objects, fiduciary and rahn tasjîly guarantees that are the same as collateral for debt not the form of an object, but proof of ownership of the object. 
 Keywords: Jaminan, fidusia, rahn, tasjîly.