MAKI Highlights 3 Unusual Issues within the Chapter Determination of the Heirs of PT Krama Yudha vs. Arsjad Rasjid – 2024-06-16 06:06:14

by times news cr

2024-06-16 06:06:14

The environment of the choice of the PKPU case quantity NO.226/PDT.SUS-PKPU/2023/PN.NIAGA.JKT.PST, dated Might 31, 2024. Photograph: supply for jpnn

jpnn.comJAKARTA – Coordinator of the Indonesian Anti-Corruption Society (MAKI) Boyamin Saiman mentioned that the Business Court docket’s determination on the Central Jakarta District Court docket Quantity 226 shouldn’t be determined in PKPU or chapter.

The reason being that this case just isn’t easy, it have to be confirmed in an bizarre civil courtroom.

“It’s clear that PKPU and Chapter need to have the debt confirmed merely, however on this case it’s as a result of there was a promise to offer a bonus within the 1998 notarial deed, however we do not know when it got here into impact and when it ended, what format it was in, so it needs to be confirmed by the civil courtroom,” defined Boyamin.

Other than that, everyone seems to be guessing in regards to the precise quantity of the debt, it can’t be unilaterally transformed immediately from the corporate’s internet revenue, then submitted a sure proportion, then decided by the supervisory decide and acknowledged by the administration, the quantity of the debt just isn’t clear or clear, that could be a downside.

“So there are three issues, that is the room’s fault and the decide additionally did not take a look at it rigorously, firstly, this matter just isn’t easy, secondly, the quantity of the debt just isn’t clear, the time period of the settlement from when to when is in what format,” mentioned Boyamin.

He added that issues like this could not turn out to be unhealthy incidents in settling money owed and receivables in Indonesia, and don’t mirror justice, particularly if the heirs are foreigners from Singapore.

“So on this case the judges, directors and curators have to be cautious in assessing this case sooner or later if there are authorized efforts and different settlement mechanisms,” defined Boyamin.

Boyamin highlighted the efficiency of the Panel of Judges who selected chapter. However, the Supreme Court docket Supervisory Physique should additionally step in to look at these two Judges due to the controversial choices on this case and in different circumstances.

Boyamin Saiman mentioned that the Business Court docket’s determination at Central Jakarta District Court docket Quantity 226 shouldn’t be determined in PKPU or chapter.

You may also like

Leave a Comment