BENTURAN ANTARA HAK KREDITUR SEPARATIS DAN PRINSIP KELANGSUNGAN USAHA: MENATA ULANG PRIORITAS DALAM HUKUM KEPAILITAN INDONESIA

Abstrak

Abstrak
Penelitian ini mengkaji benturan antara hak kreditur separatis dan prinsip kelangsungan usaha (going concern principle) dalam hukum kepailitan Indonesia, khususnya dalam putusan perkara Nomor 9/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2024/PN Niaga Sby terhadap PT Empat Jaya Indonesia. Fokus penelitian diarahkan pada bagaimana pengadilan niaga menerapkan prinsip kepastian hukum melalui asas pembuktian sederhana, sekaligus menilai sejauh mana keadilan substantif dan perlindungan terhadap kelangsungan usaha debitor diperhatikan dalam praktik peradilan. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konseptual, dan pendekatan kasus. Bahan hukum diperoleh melalui studi kepustakaan terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan, putusan pengadilan, serta literatur hukum yang relevan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Majelis Hakim lebih mengedepankan pendekatan formalistik dengan berpegang pada Pasal 2 ayat (1) dan Pasal 8 ayat (4) Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan PKPU. Pengadilan menilai syarat kepailitan telah terpenuhi karena adanya dua atau lebih kreditur dan utang yang telah jatuh tempo serta dapat ditagih. Namun demikian, pendekatan tersebut dinilai belum mencerminkan keadilan substantif karena hakim tidak menguji secara mendalam kondisi insolvabilitas debitor, dugaan bad faith pemohon, maupun dampak sosial-ekonomi akibat putusan pailit terhadap pekerja dan keberlangsungan usaha perusahaan. Oleh karena itu, diperlukan reformasi hukum kepailitan melalui penerapan prinsip kehati-hatian, penguatan uji insolvabilitas secara materiil, serta penyeimbangan perlindungan antara hak kreditur separatis dan kepentingan kelangsungan usaha debitor agar tercipta sistem kepailitan yang lebih adil, humanis, dan berorientasi pada kemanfaatan sosial.

Kata Kunci: kreditur separatis, kepailitan, kelangsungan usaha, kepastian hukum, keadilan substantif.

Abstract
This study examines the conflict between the rights of secured creditors and the going concern principle within the Indonesian bankruptcy law system, particularly in Decision Number 9/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2024/PN Niaga Sby concerning PT Empat Jaya Indonesia. The research focuses on how the commercial court applies the principle of legal certainty through the doctrine of simple proof while also assessing the extent to which substantive justice and the protection of the debtor’s business continuity are considered in judicial practice. This research employs a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. Legal materials were collected through library research involving legislation, court decisions, and relevant legal literature. The findings indicate that the panel of judges prioritized a formalistic approach by strictly applying Article 2 paragraph (1) and Article 8 paragraph (4) of Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations. The court concluded that the bankruptcy requirements had been fulfilled due to the existence of two or more creditors and debts that were due and collectible. However, this approach is considered insufficient in realizing substantive justice because the judges did not thoroughly examine the debtor’s actual insolvency condition, the alleged bad faith of the petitioners, or the socio-economic impacts of the bankruptcy decision on employees and the sustainability of the company’s business operations. Therefore, bankruptcy law reform is necessary through the implementation of a prudential principle, strengthening material insolvency tests, and balancing the protection of secured creditors’ rights with the continuity interests of the debtor’s business in order to establish a more just, humane, and socially beneficial bankruptcy system.

Keywords: secured creditors, bankruptcy, going concern, legal certainty, substantive justice.