https://edunity.publikasikupublisher.com

645

Edunity

Volume 2 Number 6, June 2023

p- ISSN 2963-3648- e-ISSN 2964-8653

Doi: 10.57096/edunity.v2i5.106

https://edunity.publikasikupublisher.com/index.php/Edunity/index

NOTARY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR MAKING DEEDS BASED

ON FALSE STATEMENTS (CASE STUDY OF DECISION

NUMBER: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL)

Eztha Oke Sonia

, Mella Ismelina Farma Rahayu

Faculty of Law, Tarumanagara University, West Jakarta, Indonesia

1*,2

Email: okesoniaa@gmail.com

, mellaismelina@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

Notaries are public officials (openbare ambtenaren) appointed by the Ministry of Law and

Human Rights (KEMENKUMHAM) who have the authority to make authentic deeds. The

notary deed clearly explains the rights and obligations of the parties so that the notary deed

becomes the strongest and most complete means of evidence because it can prove the truth of its

contents compared to a deed made privately. If a Notary as a public official is proven to have

made a mistake in the deed they made, then as a result of their actions they can be held

accountable both criminally and civilly if it causes a loss. In the case of the South Jakarta District

Court decision number 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL a Notary in Tangerang was involved in

a civil case of unlawful acts that resulted in the deed’s cancellation. A notary deed that is

canceled by a court decision does not mean the result of a notary's mistake in making the deed,

but can also be caused by an error or negligence on the part of the parties resulting in a lawsuit

because the notary has made the deed in accordance with the regulations. The notary as a public

official has the right to refuse not to notify the contents of the deed in accordance with the oath

of office they uttered and taking the minutes of the deed and calling the notary must go through

the approval of Notary Honorary Council as an institution that has the authority to carry out

guidance and supervision of the notary and the existence of the right of refusal. become a form

of legal protection for Notaries when carrying out their duties. This study uses normative legal

research methods, by analyzing court decisions as the primary legal.

Keywords: Notary; Deed; Unlawful Acts; Legal Protection; False Steatments

Introduction

Notaries are public officials (openbare ambtenaren) appointed by the Ministry of Law

and Human Rights (KEMENKUMHAM) who have the authority to make authentic

deeds. The main authority of the Notaryis execute authentic deeds made according to

the JN Law in front of a Notary (Abady & Rahayu, 2023).

The existence of the position of Notary in Indonesia certainly cannot be separated from

the influence of Dutch law basic concordant, so that the position of Notary has been

known for a long time in Indonesia (Harahap, 2020). Regulations related to the position

of Notary originally came from happening Statable of 1860 Number 3Regulations op Het

Amby in Netherlands Indie, and is still valid until there are no amendment regulations

(Prabawa, 2017)

Notaries in carrying out their positions are guided by the rules stipulated in Law

Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Position of Notary as amended by Law Number 2 of

2014 concerning Amendments to Law Number 30 of 2004 regarding the Position of

Notary. Based on Article 1 number 1 of Law 2/2014 it is stated that a Notary is a public

Vol. 2, No. 6, 2023

[Notary Responsibilities for Making Deeds Based on False Statements (Case

Study of Decision Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL)]

646

Eztha Oke Sonia, Mella Ismelina Farma Rahayu

official authorized to make needs authentic and has other authorities as referred to in

this Law or based on other laws.

The notary deed clearly explains the rights and obligations of the parties so that the

notary deed becomes the strongest and most complete evidence in resolving a dispute

that occurs (Flora, 2012). An authentic deed can prove the truth of its contents compared

to a deed made under the hand. An authentic deed can prove that what is stated in the

deed is true and is the will of the parties (Fatmawati & Halim, 2022). The implementation

of the position of Notary is subject to laws and regulations and a code of ethics. The

Notary Code of Ethics is a moral principle determined by the Association of Indonesian

Notary Associations which must be obeyed by everyone who performs their duties as a

Notary. The Notary Code of Ethics in its application contains demands, guidance, moral

guidelines, or decency both as individuals and as public officials who provide services

to the community for making deeds (FR, 2021). The supervision over the implementation

of the code of ethics is carried out by:

a. At the Regency/City level by Regional Managers and Regional Honorary Councils;

b. At the provincial level by the regional administrators and the regional honorary

council:

c. At the National level by the Central Executive and the Central Honorary Council.

Forgery of letters is a crime regulated in CHAPTER XII of the Second Book in Article 263

paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code which reads "Anyone who makes a fake letter or

forges a letter that can give rise to a right, agreement or debt relief, or which is designated

as evidence of something things with the intention to use or order other people to use

the letter can causeloss, for forgery of letters, with a maximum imprisonment of six

years", in Article 264 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code it is also stated that forgery of

authentic deeds is punishable by imprisonment for a maximum of 8 (eight) years and

based on Article 266 paragraph (1 ) Criminal Code, if you enter a false statement into an

authentic deed with the intention of using or ordering someone else to use the deed and

cause a loss, you may be subject to imprisonment for a maximum of 7 (seven) years

(Prabawa, 2017). As for what is meant by "making a fake letter" is compiling a letter or

writing in its entirety, the act of falsifying the letter is carried out by making changes

without permission in a letter, either changing the signature or the contents of the letter

so that it causes a loss so that the act can be categorized as an unlawful act. Provisions

related to unlawful acts in Indonesia are regulated in Article 1365 of the Civil Code. As

for according Miriam Darus Badrulzaman's rule that the condition of an action is an act

against the lawis as follows:

a. There must be action, both positive and negative;

b. The act must be against the law; (Tanaya, 2018)

c. There are downsides;

d. There is a cause-and-effect relationship between the illegal act and the loss;

It is. There is an error (schuld).

If a Notary as a public official is proven to have made a mistake in the deed he made,

then as a result of his actions he can be held accountable both criminally and civilly if he

causes a loss.

Authentic deed essentially contains formal truth based on the information received by

the Notary by the parties, so that a Notary profession requires thoroughness and caution

in carrying out their duties because an authentic deed has the perfect and strongest

evidentiary power in court. If it is proven that the authentic deed made by the Notary is

fake, it can be said that the authentic deed has turned into a private deed and can be

[Notary Responsibilities for Making Deeds Based on False Statements (Case

Study of Decision Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL)]

Vol. 2, No. 6, 2023

https://edunity.publikasikupublisher.com

647

canceled by law. If the elements of error are met in an authentic deed, then the Notary

can be held accountable.

Research Method

Types of research

This research uses normative legal research because this research is sourced from

secondary data with primary legal materials in the form of UU JN, secondary legal

material, namely the South Jakarta District Court Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN

JKT.SEL and with use other research materials

Research Approach

In this study, the authors use a statutory approach or statute approach. By examining

all the regulations in force in Indonesia that are related to the legal issues that are the

topic of research.

Types of Legal Materials

Data used in research are:

1. Primary materials consisting of regulations that are related to the topic of this study,

namely:

2. The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia;

3. Code of Civil Law;

4. Criminal Code;

5. Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Position of Notary; Law Number 2 of 2014

concerning Amendments to Law Number 40 of 2004 concerning the Position of

Notary; And

6. Regulation of the Minister of Law and Human Rights Number 7 of 2016 concerning

the Honorary Council of Notaries.

Secondary legal materials consist of books, journals, scientific papers, websites, and

articles. Tertiary legal materials, in this case, the Big Indonesian Dictionary or other

sources own related to the topic of this research.

Data Collection Techniques

In this study, the authors used techniques to collect data by conducting a literature study

consisting of books, journals, and other supporting documents related to the topic of this

research. In addition to the literature study, the author will also conduct interviews

Which later can become supporting data in the form of analysis of the results of

interviews with someone who serves as a Notary.

Analysis Techniques

The legal material that will be used in this study uses the deduction method by applying

logic to one or more statements based on the given premises. In general, analysis by

deduction method is concluding a general problem to get something special from that

general thing.

Result And Discussion

Research result

Case Description

M. Ismet Abdullah (“Plaintiff”) owns a plot of land with an area of 1,989 m2 which is

located at Jl. Abdul Majid No. 1RT 005/ RW 007, South Cipete Village, Cilandak District,

South Jakarta with Certificate Property Rights No. 2765/South Cipete. Then, Kemal

Suryo Setyo Utomo (“Defendant I”), Yenni (“Defendant II”), Frederik Tomasowa

(Defendant III), and Achmad Fikri (“Defendant IV”) jointly made the deed of the Sale

and Purchase Agreement (PPJB) No. 12 dated October 19, 2019, at the Notary Office of

Vol. 2, No. 6, 2023

[Notary Responsibilities for Making Deeds Based on False Statements (Case

Study of Decision Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL)]

648

Eztha Oke Sonia, Mella Ismelina Farma Rahayu

Lusi Indriani, S.H., M.Kn. (“Co-Defendant I”) of land belonging to the Plaintiff to Noven

Yuliat (‘Co-Defendant II”) without the knowledge of the Plaintiff as the legal owner of

the Land Object. The Defendants made the PPJB deed by committing identity theft and

falsifying documents for the land sale and purchase transaction, while the falsified

documents were:

a. Identity Card (KTP) with Population Registration Number (NIK) 3174061708490005,

is the identity of Plaintiff with a photo that has been replaced with the face of

Defendant I;

b. Identity Card (KTP) with Population Registration Number (NIK) 3174065010550004,

is the identity of the Plaintiff's wife with a photo that has been replaced with the face

of Defendant II;

c. Family Card (KK) Number 3174062711141017 made as if Defendant IV was the head

of the family;

d. The marriage book that was forged as if it belonged to the Plaintiff's wife;

It is. Certificate Property Rights No. 2765/South Cipete which was forged.

The entire process of transferring land objects owned by the Plaintiff through PPJB

Number 12 between the Defendants and the Co-Defendant is an illegal act and makes

the PPJB that has been made null and void or at least can be canceled because it was

made in violation of the legal terms of the agreement based on Article 1320 KUH Civil.

Co-Defendant I was involved as a Notary in the case because he had made a deed based

on a stolen identity and fake documents, the deeds that had been made for the sale and

purchase transaction process included:

a. Sale Purchase Agreement (PPJB) No. 12th October 19

, 2019;

b. Deed of Emptying Agreement No. 13th October 9

, 2019; And

c. Act of Power to Sell No. 14 on October 9, 2019.

The existence of the land sale and purchase transaction began when Defendant IV, who

is a financial administrator, was in debt of Rp. 2,000,000,00.00 (two billion rupiahs) with

a third party, which then Defendant IV received advice to take certificate ownership

above object Ground from Plaintiff's safe to forge. After checking the Land Objects by a

broker and Co-Defendant II, an agreement was made to buy and sell the Land Objects

for Rp. 5,000,000,000.00 (five billion rupiahs) and the Plaintiff denied that he had ever

received money from a sale and purchase transaction. This is from Co-Defendant II.

If calculated based on the selling price of the Tax Selling Object Value (NJOP) of the Land

Object, the selling price should be around IDR 18,000,000,000.00 (eighteen billion

rupiahs) and if calculated by the Public Appraisal Service Office (KJPP), the selling price

object The land at least is IDR 50,000,000,000.00 (fifty billion rupiah) at the time of

liquidation and IDR 75,000,000,000.00 (seventy-five billion rupiah) when the fair price

was applied. So that the selling price in the transaction carried out by the Defendants

constitutes legal smuggling. The presence of unlawful acts (PMH) committed by the

Defendants resulted in legal defects in the process of transferring the Plaintiff's Land

Objects.

As a result of the loss as described and accompanied by legal evidence, it is correct for

the Plaintiff's actions to file a lawsuit

Judge's Consideration

In giving judges' considerations before deciding, some analyses in giving considerations:

(Sugiannur et al., 2020)

a. The evidence submitted by the plaintiff and the defendant fulfills the material and

formal requirements;

[Notary Responsibilities for Making Deeds Based on False Statements (Case

Study of Decision Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL)]

Vol. 2, No. 6, 2023

https://edunity.publikasikupublisher.com

649

b. Evidence from which party has reached the minimum limit proof;

c. What are the arguments for the lawsuit and which arguments for rebuttal are proven;

d. The strength of evidence owned by the parties.

The judge's considerations used in deciding the case described above, are that it is true

that the plot of land which is the object of the dispute covering an area of 1,989 m2 with

a Certificate of Ownership Number 2785 Cipete Selatan Village, Cilandak District, South

Jakarta City belongs to the Plaintiff and to the land which is the object of the dispute was

PMH by the Defendants. The authentic deed made by Co-Defendant I has evidentiary

value outwardly and is the strongest evidence and because the Plaintiff, in this case, feels

disadvantaged as a result of the deed, the Plaintiff is obliged to prove the mistake of

issuing the deed based on Article 163 HIR/283 RBg. Certificate of Ownership No. 2785

as a supporting document for sale and purchase transactions object This land is proving

fake in due the plaintiff was able to provide evidence in the form of an authentic deed

and based on Article 1870Civil Code has perfect evidentiary power and refers to court

decisions with numbers as follows:

a. Excerpt of Decision on Criminal Case Number: 421/Pid.B/2020/PN.Jkt.Sel;

b. Excerpt of Decision on Criminal Case Number: 419/Pid.B/2020/PN.Jkt.Sel;

c. Excerpt of Decision on Criminal Case Number: 4161/Pid.B/2020/PN.Jkt.Sel;

d. Excerpt of Decision on Criminal Case Number: 417/Pid.B/2020/PN.Jkt.Sel; And It is.

Excerpt of Decision on Criminal Case Number: 420/Pid.B/2020/PN.Jkt.Sel.

With what has been described above and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff and

based on the information from Witness I, namely the child of the Plaintiff, and Witness

II, namely the son-in-law of the Plaintiff, hereinafter referred to as the Witnesses, which

is essentially October 1, 2019, to 15 October 2019, the Plaintiff together with Witness I

traveled to Japan and South Korea, so it is not by the date on which the Deed of Sale and

Purchase Agreement Number 12, Deed of Emptying Agreement Number 13 and Deed

of Power of Attorney to Sell Number 14 were signed, namely on October 9, 2019. So, the

legal requirements of the agreement are not fulfilled and the deeds become null and void

and can be asked for compensation or can provide the fairest decision (ex aequo et bono)

to provide legal certainty for the parties and to create law enforcement.

Judge's decision

The principle of freedom of judges in opinion (impartial judge) as in Article 5 of Law

Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power is reflected in the attitude of judges when

giving court decisions, a judge must be on the right side, not be one-sided and not

discriminate between people. Court decisions must contain 4 (four) principles as follows:

(Madinah, 2020)

a. Contains Clear and Detailed Basic Reasons

All court decisions must contain the reasons and basis for the decision by including

the articles of the legislation relating to the case or based on unwritten law or

jurisprudence or a legal doctrine. Judges as law enforcers must explore and

understand the values that live in society.

b. Compulsory to Trial All Parts of the Lawsuit

Before deciding on a case, the judge is required to thoroughly examine and adjudicate

every lawsuit filed.

c. Can't grant more than the claim

This prohibition is called ultra petite parties, and will be called acting beyond its

authority if deciding a case exceeds the posita or petite of the plaintiff even though it

intends to have good faith or for the public interest, which is also confirmed through

the Supreme Court Decision Number: 1001 K/Sip/1972 that judges are prohibited

from granting things that were not asked for.

Vol. 2, No. 6, 2023

[Notary Responsibilities for Making Deeds Based on False Statements (Case

Study of Decision Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL)]

650

Eztha Oke Sonia, Mella Ismelina Farma Rahayu

d. Spoken in public

Decisions are pronounced in court hearings that are open to the public to ensure that

the judicial process that is carried out is avoided from being disgraceful as stipulated

in Article 13 of the Law on Judicial Powers.

As described in the description of the case and the consideration of the judges in the

Decision of the South Jakarta District Court Number: 782/Pdt.G/2020/PN JKT.Sel it is

stated that the Defendants, both individually and jointly, have committed PMH which

resulted in the deeds notary in the form of Deed of Sale and Purchase Agreement

Number 12 dated 9 October 2019, Deed of Emptying Agreement Number 13 dated 9

October 2019 and Deed of Power of Attorney to Sell Number 14 dated 9 October 2019

declared legally disabled and has nostrength legally binding. The court is a place for

people seeking justice, so that the Panel of Judges is expected to be able to give decisions

in the fairest way possible in order to achieve legal certainty, justice, and expediency.

Discussion

Elements of Unlawful Acts (PMH) Against the PPJB Deed Based on South Jakarta

District Court Decision Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL

The results of the Decision of the South Jakarta District Court Number:

782/Pdt.G/2020/PN.JKT.Sel, stating that the Defendants either individually and/or

jointly have carried out PMH, and stated the Sale and Purchase Binding Deed Number

12 , Deed of Emptying Agreement Number 13 and Deed of Power of Attorney to Sell

Number 14 made before Notary Lusi Indriani, S.H., M.Kn. is legally disabled and has no

binding legal force. The three deeds are party deeds that are subject to Article 1320 of

the Civil Code with the following conditions:

1. Agree those who bind themselves;

2. Ability to make engagements;

3. A certain thing;

4. A legitimate reason.

The objective requirements that are not met here are due to bad faith, as stated in Article

1338 of the Civil Code (Amalia, 2018). Defendant IV as a family member of Plaintiff who

has a debt of Rp. 2,000,000,000 (two billion rupiahs) has committed legal smuggling to

take advantage of paying his debts by conducting a sale and purchase transaction on

object Plaintiff's land. The will and willingness to mutually bind the parties to make an

agreement which is one of the legal requirements of the agreement. In this case, where

the Plaintiff's figure was replaced and the Plaintiff's identity was falsified and he was

not aware of a sale and purchase transaction object Land indicates that there is indeed

no will from the Plaintiff owner object Land to make the deeds.

In the description of the case described above, the actions of the Defendants constituted

an unlawful act in the form of falsifying authentic deeds by providing false statements

with the intention that deeds be drawn up for the purpose of buying and selling

transactions object Land has fulfilled the elements of an unlawful act as stipulated in

Article 1365 of the Civil Code. If there is a loss that a person gets because of an unlawful

act committed by another person, then he has the right to make a claim for compensation

by filing a lawsuit for his actions that conflict with the obligations of the perpetrator.

When based on the elements of acts against the law, the actions of the Defendants can be

described as follows:

1. There is an action

The actions, in this case, were in the form of signing the Deed of Sale and Purchase

Agreement Number 12 dated 9 October 2019, the Deed of Emptying Agreement

[Notary Responsibilities for Making Deeds Based on False Statements (Case

Study of Decision Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL)]

Vol. 2, No. 6, 2023

https://edunity.publikasikupublisher.com

651

Number 13 dated 9 October 2019 and the Deed of Power of Attorney to Sell Number

14 dated 9 October 2019 as well as engineering a sale and purchase transaction object

Land.

2. This act is against the law

The actions committed by the Defendants can be categorized as unlawful acts,

because they fulfill the following elements:

a. Violation of applicable laws;

b. Acts that violate the rights of others guaranteed by law;

c. Actions contrary to the legal obligations of the perpetrator;

d. Acts contrary to morality;

e. Actions are the opposite of good attitudes.

The action referred to here is the signing of the deed that violated Article 1320 of the

Civil Code regarding the legal terms of the agreement and as described above that

the deed was made in violation of the legal terms of the agreement and violated the

Plaintiff's rights as the owner object Land. The existence of bad faith to make buying

and selling transactions object to Land by falsifying documents, violating the

principles and subjective rights of the Plaintiff causing harm to the Plaintiff.

3. There is a loss

Losses in the form of identity theft belonging to Plaintiff by Defendant IV for the

purpose of buying and selling object Land, where Plaintiff has no intention to

relinquish his rights to the Land Object (Boris Tampubolon, 2021). The loss that there

is a possibility that Plaintiff will lose the right to the Land Object as a result of the

existence of the authentic deed, as well as losses material and immaterial.

4. There is a causal relationship between the deed and the loss

The losses described above were of course caused by unlawful acts committed by the

Defendants.

Notary Responsibilities for Deeds Based on False Statements

If a Notary is proven to have committed an unlawful act, he must be held accountable

for the consequences of his actions, because the Notary in carrying out his profession is

guided by the JN Law so that he always behaves carefully and scrupulously. Based on

Article 65UUJN, the Notary is responsible for every deed he makes even though the

Notary protocol has been submitted to the Notary protocol keeper. Legal protection for

a Notary in carrying out his duties and positions is regulated in Law Number 30 of 2004

concerning the Office of a Notary as amended by Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning

Amendments to Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Position of a Notary. This can

be seen when a Notary is involved in a legal case as stipulated in Article 66UUJN, that

taking a minuta deed and summoning a Notary must be approved by the Notary

Honorary Council as an institution that has the authority to carry out guidance and

supervision of Notaries.

A notary as a public official has the right to deny not notifying the contents of the deed

in accordance with the oath of office he uttered under Article 16 paragraph (1) letter f of

the JN Law, with the permission of the Supervisory Board a Notary can provide

information relating to the contents of the deed if necessary for the benefit of court and

the right of refusal is a form of legal protection for a Notary who has carried out his

duties based on the JN Law and the Code of Ethics, besides that an authentic deed is a

state document so that its authenticity needs to be maintained and the contents of the

deed must be kept confidential. When the Notary pronounces his oath of office, at that

Vol. 2, No. 6, 2023

[Notary Responsibilities for Making Deeds Based on False Statements (Case

Study of Decision Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL)]

652

Eztha Oke Sonia, Mella Ismelina Farma Rahayu

time he is also fully responsible for all his actions by determining whether a legal action

can be included in the deed. (Supriadi, 2023)

Examination of the Notary must be based on the procedure for making a Notary deed,

namely (Adjie, 2011):

a. Perform identification of appeasers, based on the identity shown to the Notary;

b. Understand the wishes or desires of the parties (question-and-answer);

c. Checking evidence of letters related to the wishes or wishes of the parties;

d. Giving advice and creating a deed framework to meet the wishes of the parties;

It is. Fulfill all administrative techniques for making notarial deeds, such as reading,

signing, giving copies and filing of minutes deed; And

f. Carry out other obligations related to the implementation of Notary duties.

A notarial deed that is canceled by a court decision does not mean the result of a notary's

mistake in making the deed, but can also be caused by an error or negligence of the

parties resulting in a lawsuit from one of the parties who feel aggrieved. In the Decision

of the South Jakarta District Court Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL which was

decided on Tuesday, October 19, 2021, is a cancellation of the Notary deed caused by an

error by one of the parties and the decision has legal consequences for the Co-Defendant

I as a Notary, namely in the form of Sale and Purchase Agreement Deed Number 12

dated October 9, 2019, Deed of Emptying Agreement Number 13 dated October 9, 2019,

and Deed of Power of Attorney to Sell Number 14 dated October 9 2019 which must be

declared legally disabled and do not have binding legal force, the role of Notary in

making the deed only put the interests of the parties into the deed.

In principle, if a notarial deed is made in compliance with the regulations stipulated by

laws and regulations and fulfills the formal requirements, then the deed cannot be

canceled. However, in this case, the deeds were drawn up based on false information

provided by the Defendants for a sale and purchase transaction object The land and of

course, the cancellation of the deed has an impact on third parties, namely Co-Defendant

II as the buyer and the responsibility for this incident is not borne by the Notary because

the Notary has carried out his duties in accordance with applicable regulations and

therefore the Notary cannot be prosecuted for the making of the deed made based on

false information.

Deeds that are declared null and void, can be canceled and non-existent are the same

thing, that is, they both result in an agreement becoming invalid, as for the differences

between them is as follows (Mulyoto, 2012):

1. Null for the sake of law, namely the legal action has no legal consequences since the

existence of a legal action based on a court decision that has permanent legal force

because it does not meet objective requirements;

2. Can be canceled, namely the legal action has no legal consequences since the

cancellation. The canceled deed can still be valid and binding on the parties if there is

no court decision that has the permanent legal force to cancel the deed;

3. Non-existent, namely those caused by not fulfilling the essential elements of an

agreement, and in practice it requires a court decision that has permanent legal force

with the same implications as being null and void.

Co-Defendant I as the maker of the deed is obliged to be responsible for his negligence

by complying with the court's decision to cancel the deed. However, if the fault lies with

the notary who was involved in making the deed intentionally based on the false

statement, then the aggrieved party can file a lawsuit against the notary's actions by

being able to prove that there was a mistake made by the notary which caused a loss and

[Notary Responsibilities for Making Deeds Based on False Statements (Case

Study of Decision Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL)]

Vol. 2, No. 6, 2023

https://edunity.publikasikupublisher.com

653

between the loss and the mistake. have a causal relationship (Mayra & Simatupang, n.d.)

The judge's decision in this case was very appropriate, because the deeds were made

based on false information and this action was an act against the law.

Conclusion

A notary as a public official has the right to deny not notifying the contents of the deed

in accordance with the oath of office he uttered under Article 16 paragraph (1) letter f of

the JN Law, this can be seen when the Notary is involved in a legal case as stipulated in

Article 66UUJN, that taking minuta deed and summoning a notary must go through the

approval of the Notary Honorary Council as an institution that has the authority to carry

out guidance and supervision of a notary and the existence of the right of refusal is a

form of legal protection for a notary who has carried out his duties based on UUJN and

the Code of Ethics, in addition to that authentic deed which is a state document so it is

necessary to maintain its authenticity and keep the contents of the deed confidential.

Bibliography

Abady, A. R. P., & Rahayu, M. I. F. (2023). Penyuluhan Hukum Pembuatan Akta oleh

Notaris Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 Tentang Jabatan

Notaris. Journal on Education, 5(2), 4248–4258. Google Scholar

Adjie, H. (2011). Kebatalan dan Pembatalan Akta Notaris, Bandung: PT. Refika Aditama.

Google Scholar

Amalia, I. Q. A. (2018). Akibat Hukum Pembatalan Perjanjian dalam Putusan Nomor

1572 K/PDT/2015 Berdasarkan Pasal 1320 dan 1338 KUH Perdata. Jurnal Hukum

Bisnis Bonum Commune. Google Scholar

Boris Tampubolon, S. H. (2021). Panduan Memahami (Masalah) Hukum Di Masyarakat Agar

Tidak Menjadi Korban. Prenada Media. Google Scholar

Fatmawati, N., & Halim, A. J. (2022). Derivasi Bahasa Hukum Mengenai Kebatalan Dan

Pembatalan Akta Notaris. Jurnal Hukum Dan Kenotariatan, 6(2), 1226–1231.

Google Scholar

Flora, H. S. (2012). Tanggung Jawab Notaris Pengganti Dalam Pembuatan Akta. Kanun

Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 14(2), 179–199. Google Scholar

Fr, M. I. (2021). Batasan Pelaksanaan Hak Ingkar Notaris Dalam Rangka Menjaga

Kerahasiaan Akta Menurut Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 2

Tahun 2014 Perubahan Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 Tentang Jabatan

Notaris. Jurnal Hukum Adigama, 4(1), 650–670. Google Scholar

Harahap, Z. (2020). Pembuatan Salinan Akta Berdasarkan Protokol Werda Notaris Yang Telah

Diserahkan Pada Notaris Pemegang Protokol. Google Scholar

Madinah, S. (2020). Penerapan Asas Sederhana, Cepat Dan Biaya Ringan Pada Penyelesain

Perkara Perceraian Di Pengadilan Agama Kotabaru. Google Scholar

Mayra, H., & Simatupang, D. P. (n.d.). Akta Dinyatakan Batal Demi Hukum Oleh

Pengadilan: Bagaimana Tanggungjawab Notaris? Jurnal Kertha Semaya, 10, 163–

177. Google Scholar

Vol. 2, No. 6, 2023

[Notary Responsibilities for Making Deeds Based on False Statements (Case

Study of Decision Number: 782/PDT.G/2020/PN JKT.SEL)]

654

Eztha Oke Sonia, Mella Ismelina Farma Rahayu

Mulyoto, P. (2012). Tehnik, cara membuat, dan hukum perjanjian yang harus dikuasai.

Cakrawala Media, Yogyakarta. Google Scholar

Prabawa, B. G. A. (2017). Analisis Yuridis Tentang Hak Ingkar Notaris Dalam Hal

Pemeriksaan Menurut Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris Dan Kode Etik Notaris.

Acta Comitas: Jurnal Hukum Kenotariatan, 2(1), 98–110. Google Scholar

Sugiannur, S., Imam, W. Z., & Rumkel, N. (2020). Tinjauan Yuridis terhadap Putusan

Pengadilan Negeri terkait dengan Kompetensi Absolut dalam Penyelesaian

Sengketa Perbankan Syariah. Khairun Law Journal, 4(1), 29–42. Google Scholar

Supriadi, S. H. (2023). Etika dan Tanggung Jawab Profesi Hukum di Indonesia. Sinar Grafika.

Google Scholar

Tanaya, V. (2018). Perbuatan Melawan Hukum: Informasi Menyesatkan (Misleading

Information) dalam Prospektus Go Public. FH UPH Press. Google Scholar