Keadilan dalam Putusan Pailit: Studi terhadap Debitur yang Masih Memiliki Prospek Usaha
Abstract
This study critically examines the application of bankruptcy law in Indonesia with a specific focus on debtors who still possess viable business prospects. Grounded in John Rawls’s theory of justice and Gustav Radbruch’s legal philosophy, the research evaluates whether the implementation of bankruptcy provisions promotes substantive justice or merely reinforces creditor dominance. Using a normative juridical method that combines statutory and case approaches, several landmark court decisions, including Supreme Court Decision No. 186 K/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2015, were analyzed to assess judicial reasoning and its implications for economic recovery. The findings reveal that Indonesian courts predominantly emphasize debt repayment, often disregarding the debtor’s potential for business continuity. The rigid structure of Article 2 of the Bankruptcy Law tends to result in premature liquidation, contrasting with rehabilitative systems such as Chapter 11 in the United States. The study concludes that legal reforms are necessary to incorporate justice-oriented and rehabilitative mechanisms that balance the interests of creditors and debtors while supporting sustainable economic growth.
References
Azzalea, G., Kusumadhani, J., Dacha, R., & Nelman, M. (2023). Tanggung jawab pemerintah dalam permasalahan kreditur jika pengajuan pailit ditolak. Diponegoro Private Law Review, 8(1).
Ihsan, M., & Widyaningrum, T. (2023). Implikasi putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tentang terbukanya upaya hukum kasasi atas putusan PKPU. Jurnal Ius Constituendum, 8(2), 324–342. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v8i2.7027
Jackson, T. H. (1986). The logic and limits of bankruptcy law. Harvard University Press.
Jamilah, D. (2020). Hak pekerja dalam proses kepailitan dan penyelesaiannya pada KSP Syariah BMT FI Sabilillah Wonogiri: Perspektif hukum Islam. Fakultas Syariah, UIN Walisongo.
Mahzuki, P. M. (2017). Penelitian hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Mardiana, R. (2022). Keadilan sosial dalam putusan pailit di Indonesia. Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah.
Nugroho, B. (2019). Kepailitan sebagai mekanisme perlindungan hukum bagi kreditor dan debitur. Jurnal Rechtsvinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, 8(2), 237–250. https://rechtsvinding.bphn.go.id
Nurhayati, S. (2018). Analisis hukum kepailitan PT Metro Batavia (Batavia Air) ditinjau dari UU No. 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan PKPU. Jurnal Hukum dan Keadilan, 13(2), 201–215.
Pengadilan Niaga Jakarta Pusat. (2013, 30 Januari). Putusan pailit PT Metro Batavia (Batavia Air). Dikutip dalam E. N. Siregar, “Analisis Putusan Pailit PT Metro Batavia: Implikasi bagi Debitur dan Kreditor,” Jurnal Hukum Bengkoelen Justice, 5(2). https://ejournal.unib.ac.id/j_bengkoelenjustice/article/view/11354
Rachmadi Usman. (2014). Hukum kepailitan. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
Sentosa Sembiring. (2020). Kepailitan dan PKPU di Indonesia. Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya Journal of Legal Studies.
Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2015). Penelitian hukum normatif: Suatu tinjauan singkat. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.
Subekti, R., & Tjitrosudibio, R. (2010). Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata. Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita.
Suryana, C. (2022). Perspektif peradilan di Indonesia. UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung. https://digilib.uinsgd.ac.id/70842/
Sjahdeini, S. R. (2002). Hukum kepailitan. Jakarta: Pustaka Utama Grafiti.
Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Home/Details/40784
Warren, E. (1993). Bankruptcy policy. University of Chicago Law Review.
Wibowo, A. (2020). Restrukturisasi dan homologasi dalam kasus PKPU PT Trikomsel Oke Tbk: Tantangan implementasi hukum kepailitan di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Bisnis dan Investasi, 7(1), 45–59.
