LEGAL PROTECTION FOR BANKS AGAINST NON-CERTIFIED LAND COLLATERAL
DOI:
10.54443/ijerlas.v5i6.4963Published:
2026-01-11Downloads
Abstract
This study examines legal protection for banks in facing bad loans with non-certificate land as collateral, particularly in the context of distributing Working Capital Credit (KMK) to MSMEs. In banking practice, non-certificate land such as girik, petok D, or segel is still widely used as collateral even though it does not meet the formal requirements as an object of Mortgage Rights as regulated in Law Number 4 of 1996. This condition creates vulnerability for banks as creditors, because non-certificate land documents only function as proof of control, not proof of rights, so they do not have executorial power. This study uses a normative juridical method with a statutory and conceptual approach to examine the gap between positive law and banking practice. The results show that preventive legal protection for banks is reflected in the provisions on collateral assessment, the bank's obligation to apply the principle of prudence, and the bank's internal regulations regarding credit risk mitigation. Repressive legal protection is realized through legal remedies that can be taken if the debtor defaults, including through simple lawsuits, risk transfer through debt acknowledgment agreements, and civil execution based on debt-receivable relationships. This study also formulates a conceptualization of dispute resolution that includes mediation, credit restructuring, and litigation as a last resort. The results of this study confirm that the use of non-certificate collateral requires strengthened regulations and harmonization between agrarian and banking law to ensure legal certainty and protection for creditors.
Keywords:
Legal Protection Bad Credit Non-Certificate Collateral Bank Mortgage Rights.References
Budiono, Herlien, 2010, Ajaran Umum Hukum Perjanjian dan Penerapannya di Bidang Kenoktariatan, Bandung: Citra Aditya Abadi”.
Indonesia. Undang-Undang Perbankan Nomor 10 tahun 1998 tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 7 tahun 1992 Tambahan Lembar Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 3790”.
Kasmir, 2012, Dasar-Dasar Perbankan, Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
M. Djumhana, 2011, Hukum Perbankan di Indonesia, Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.
Muis, Abdullah Ahadish Shamad, dan Lailatul Mukarromah, 2021, Penilaian Agunan Dalam Keputusan Pemberian Pembiayaan Di BMT Mandiri Ukhuwah Persada Surabaya.
Pusat Bahasa Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2008. Kamus Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Pusat Bahasa.
Sjahdeini, Sutan Remy, 1999, Hak Tanggungan: Asas-Asas, Ketentuan-Ketentuan Pokok dan Masalah yang Dihadapi oleh Perbankan. Cet. 1. Bandung: Alumni”.
Tria Agustia, Yulia Mirwati, dan Busyra Azheri, “Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Kreditur dalam Pembebanan Hak Tanggungan Objek yang Belum Terdaftar,” DE LEGA LATA: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 5, no. 1 (Januari 2020). 111–112.
Warman, Penerapan Asas Itikad Baik dalam Perjanjian Hutang Piutang (Studi Kasus Perkara Nomor 16/Pdt.G/2014/PN.Prm), Junal Das Sollen, Volume 7, Nomor 2, Desember 2022.
Yunita Krysna Valayvi, Jaminan Hak Tanggungan Atas Tanah Milik Pihak Ketiga Dalam Perjanjian Kredit Di Lembaga Keuangan Perbankan Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 1996 tentang Hak Tanggungan, Private Law, Vol. 4 No. 2, Solo, 2016”.
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dina Mardiana, Yenny Eta Widyanti, Reka Dewantara
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Downloads
How to Cite
