Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Notaris Atas Tindak Pidana Penipuan yang Ditujukan Kepadanya Terkait Kewajiban Formil Bagi Notaris dalam Pembuatan Akta (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 196/Pid.B/2019/Pn Dps Jo Putusan Nomor 27/Pid/2019/Pt.Dps Jo. Putusan Nomor 20 Pk/Pid/2020)

Abstract

Notarial deeds that become the subject of disputes between parties or third parties often result in the notary being implicated as an accomplice or facilitator of a criminal act. This study analyzes the notary’s liability in cases of fraud committed by one of the appearing parties in a power of attorney deed executed before a notary (the judicial considerations in Decision No. 196/Pid.B/2019/PN DPS Jo. Decision No. 27/Pid/2019/PT.DPS Jo. Decision No. 20 PK/Pid/2020, and the forms of legal protection available to notaries involved in fraud-related criminal cases. This research employs a normative legal study approach with a descriptive-analytical method. The data used in this study consists of secondary data, including primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. Data collection was conducted through a literature review, and the analysis was carried out using qualitative methods. The findings reveal that the liability of a notary in cases of fraud committed by an appearing party in a power of attorney deed must first be assessed to determine whether the notary was actively involved in the fraudulent act. The judicial considerations in Decision No. 196/Pid.B/2019/PN DPS were based on Article 378 in conjunction with Article 55(1) of the Indonesian Penal Code (KUHP). In Decision No. 20 PK/Pid/2020, the panel of judges concluded that the defendant had indeed been negligent in the execution of the power of attorney for the sale of land between the victim and witness Mansyur Tambunan. However, the court ruled that such negligence fell within the realm of administrative law as a notary’s professional responsibility, rather than constituting a criminal offense. The forms of legal protection afforded to the notary in this case involved seeking judicial review, which was ultimately granted by the court. The defendant was acquitted of all charges, as the court determined that the act in question did not constitute a criminal offense. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Decision No. 20 PK/Pid/2020 explicitly stated that the defendant’s rights, name, and dignity must be fully restored.