Criminal Liability of Debt Collectors in the Execution of Fiduciary Guarantees with Fraud Mode After the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019

Authors

  • Rommy Igrisa Universitas Dr. Soetomo
  • Subekti Subekti Universitas Dr. Soetomo

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59525/rechtsvinding.1340

Keywords:

Criminal Liability; Debt Collector; Fiduciary Guarantee; Fraud; Indonesian Criminal Law

Abstract

The execution of fiduciary guarantees by debt collectors frequently gives rise to legal problems, particularly when such execution is carried out through fraudulent practices. Following the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019, fiduciary execution may no longer be conducted unilaterally unless the debtor voluntarily surrenders the collateral object. Nevertheless, in practice, debt collectors have shifted their modus operandi from physical coercion to more subtle forms of deception in order to obtain fiduciary objects. This research aims to analyze the criminal liability of debt collectors who execute fiduciary guarantees through fraudulent means and to examine the application of criminal law to such practices. The study employs a juridical-empirical research method, combining statutory analysis with field data obtained through interviews with debtors, debt collectors, and representatives of finance companies, as well as observations of fiduciary execution practices. The findings indicate that fraudulent acts committed by debt collectors such as impersonating finance company officers, providing false information, and making deceptive promises fulfill the elements of fraud as stipulated in Article 378 of the Indonesian Criminal Code. Moreover, such actions violate the Fiduciary Security Law and the Constitutional Court’s ruling, thereby giving rise to individual criminal liability and potential corporate liability when finance companies fail to exercise proper supervision. This study concludes that stricter law enforcement and enhanced legal awareness are necessary to protect debtors’ rights and ensure lawful fiduciary execution practices.

References

Arief, B. N. (2018). Bunga rampai kebijakan hukum pidana. Jakarta: Kencana.

Chazawi, A. (2016). Hukum pidana positif Indonesia. Malang: Setara Press.

Fuady, M. (2017). Hukum jaminan utang: Jaminan fidusia. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Hamzah, A. (2019). Hukum pidana Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Hiariej, E. O. S. (2016). Prinsip-prinsip hukum pidana. Yogyakarta: Cahaya Atma Pustaka.

Ilyas, A. (2018). Asas-asas hukum pidana. Yogyakarta: Rangkang Education.

Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. (2019). Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia.

Marzuki, P. M. (2017). Penelitian hukum. Jakarta: Kencana.

Moeljatno. (2015). Asas-asas hukum pidana. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Muladi, & Arief, B. N. (2010). Teori-teori dan kebijakan pidana. Bandung: Alumni.

Nasution, B. J. (2021). Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 terhadap pelaksanaan eksekusi jaminan fidusia. Jurnal Konstitusi, 18(2), 345–362.

Prasetyo, T. (2019). Hukum pidana. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.

Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 1101 K/Pid/2020.

Republik Indonesia. (1999). Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1999 Nomor 168.

Republik Indonesia. (1981). Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1981 Nomor 76.

Republik Indonesia. (2023). Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Kementerian Hukum dan HAM RI.

Siregar, R. (2022). Pertanggungjawaban pidana debt collector dalam penarikan objek jaminan fidusia. Skripsi. Universitas Sumatera Utara.

Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2015). Penelitian hukum normatif. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.

Sutrisno, E. (2021). Perlindungan hukum terhadap debitur pasca putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi terkait eksekusi jaminan fidusia. Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan, 51(1), 123–138.

Widodo, A. (2020). Tindak pidana penipuan dalam praktik eksekusi jaminan fidusia oleh debt collector. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 8(2), 201–215.

Downloads

Published

2026-01-22

How to Cite

Igrisa, R., & Subekti, S. (2026). Criminal Liability of Debt Collectors in the Execution of Fiduciary Guarantees with Fraud Mode After the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019. Rechtsvinding, 4(1), 101–106. https://doi.org/10.59525/rechtsvinding.1340

Issue

Section

Articles

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.