An Analysis of the Judicial Panel's Authority in Deciding Bankruptcy Cases in Indonesia

Abstract

The study focuses on the latitude of power adopted by panel of judges in the case of bankruptcy in Indonesia in accordance with Law No. 37 of 2004 on bankruptcy and the suspension of debt payment obligation obligations (UUK-PKPU). The research paper attempts to review the extent and also the restrictions of the judicial powers with major reference being on the interpretation of the requirements of bankruptcy requisition. This research utilizes a normative approach to legal research and relies on the constitutional analysis and case studies. The results indicate that judges are bound to consideration of preliminary or prima facie evidence which is the presence of debt and the fulfillment of formal legal requirements. They also lack the mandate to decide substantive disputes as far as the debt is concerned, as these disputes are within the prerogative of general courts. Practically, this jurisdiction is reflected in the decisions of the commercial courts, which focus on the establishment of the due and collectible debts and the presence of more than a single creditor. Such limits are meant to champion the ideals of effectiveness, effortlessness and low costs in bankruptcy timelines.