The general principle on dissolution of Limited Liability Company is
stipulated under Article 143 paragraph (1) of Law No. 40 of 2007
regarding Limited Liability Company (hereinafter referred to as “Company Law”),
which provides that the dissolution of company does not automatically
erase the legal status of the company. The legal status would be lost at
the end of the liquidation process and accountability of liquidator has
been accepted by the General Meeting of Shareholder or District Cour
Article 142 of Company Law elaborates that a company can be dissolute based on the following occurrence:
- Based on the resolution of General Meeting of Shareholder;
- Due to the termination of the company’s duration as stipulated in the articles of association.
- Based on the court order;
- Due to the revoked bankruptcy statement based on binding order of the commercial court, and the bankrupt assets of the company is not sufficient to pay the bankruptcy cost;
- Due to the condition that the bankrupt assets of the company has been declared in the condition of insolvency as regulated in the Law regarding Bankruptcy and the Suspension of Debt Payment; or
- Due to the revocation of the company’s business permit, so that the company is obliged to conduct liquidation in accordance with prevailing regulation.
Further elaboration on the conditions above are as follows:
(a) Dissolution based on the resolution of General Meeting of Shareholder
Article 144 of the Company Law provides that the General Meeting of
Shareholder concerning dissolution can be held based on the proposal
from the Board of Directors, Board of Commissioners or 1 (one) or more
shareholder representing at least 1/10 (one-tenth) from the total number
of shares with voting right. Moreover, the General Meeting of
Shareholders’ resolution regarding the Company’s dissolution shall be
valid if it is taken by mutual consensus or if it is approved by at
least 3/4 (three-fourth) of the total shares issued with voting rights
are present or represented, except articles of association stipulates a
higher quorum and/or a provision regarding the adoption of resolution in
the General Meeting of Shareholders.
(b) Dissolution based on Court Order
Article 146 of the Company Law provides that Dissolution based on District Court Order can be based on request from:
- Prosecutor’s office, based on the reason that the Company has violated the public interest or the Company has committed an action that which violating the regulation;
- relevant party, based on the reason that the deed of establishment is found to be defect;
- Shareholders, Board of Directors, or the Board of Commissioners, based on the reason that it is no longer possible to run the Company.
It should be noted further that the in the event that the Court order
determines that the Company shall be dissolute, the Court will then
appoint a liquidator to handle the process of liquidation.
PROCEDURES AND MECHANISM OF DISSOLUTION OF THE COMPANY
1. Approval of the General Meeting of Shareholders
As explained above, dissolution requires a resolution from the General
Meeting of Shareholders. In order to do so, Article 79 (2), Article 82
and Article 144 (1) of CompanyLaw provides thatthe Board of Directors,
Board of Commissioners or 1 (one) or more shareholder of the Company who
representing at least 1/10 (one-tenth) from the total number of shares
with voting rightmay submit a request concerning dissolution and the
appointment of liquidator(s)to General Meeting of Shareholders of the
Company.
The General Meeting of Shareholders, in such agenda, is valid if it is
attended by shareholders who representing at least ¾ (three-quarters) of
shares with valid voting rights. In this vein, resolution of General
Meeting of Shareholders is validly adoptedif such resolution is approved
by at least ¾ (three-quarters) of the total votes legally cast at the
General Meeting of Shareholders.This is clearly enshrined by Article 89
(1) of Company Law.
Pursuant toArticle 144 (3) of Company Law, dissolution process starts
and effective since the date mentioned onthe General Meeting of
Shareholders’resolution or if such resolutiondoesnot expressly statedthe
date of dissolution process, the dissolution process is effectiveas of
the date of the General Meeting of Shareholders’ resolution.
2. Appointment of Liquidator
Dissolution shall be followed by liquidation process which is conducted
by one or more liquidator(s). This is provided by Article 142 (2) point
(a) of Company Law. If the General Meeting of Shareholdersdoes not
appoint a liquidator,therefore in accordance withArticle 142 (3) of
Company Law, the Board of Directorsof the Companyshall act as
liquidator.
3. Announcement of Liquidation
Pursuant toArticle 147 (1) of the Company Law, the liquidator within 30
(thirty) days since the effective date of the dissolution shall notify:
- All creditors concerning the dissolution by means of announcement of dissolution in a newspaper and State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia; and
- the dissolution of the Company to Minister of Law and Human Rights (“MOLHR”) to be recorded in theCompany Registrythatthe Companyis in liquidation.
The announcement as provided abovemustat leastcontain:
- the reason and legal basis of dissolution;
- the liquidator’s name and address;
- the procedure for the submission of claims; and
- the period for submission of claims.
4. Submission of Creditors’ Claims
Article 147 (3) of Company Lawprovides that all creditors may submit
their claims withina period of 60 (sixty) days calculated since the date
of announcement.
5. Settlement of Claims and Accounts Receivables
Based on Article 149 (1) of Company Law, the obligation of the
liquidator in settlingthe assets of the Companyin liquidation process
shall be as follows:
- recording and collecting the assets and debts of the Company;
- announcement in a newspaper and State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia with regard to the plan ofdistribution of assets resulting from the liquidation of the Company;
- payment to all creditors;
- payment of the remainingassets resulting from the liquidation to theshareholders;
- other actions necessary in the settlement of assetsof the Company.
The Company Law is silent in regards tothe period of liquidation
process as stated in Article 149 (1) of Company Law. However, Article
149 (3) of Company Law regulates that the period for creditors to submit
an objection to the plan ofdistribution of assets is 60 (sixty) days
from the announcement date.
6. General Meeting of Shareholdersconcerning Approval of Liquidator’s Duty and Effectiveness the liquidation of the Company
The General Meeting of Shareholdersconcerning approval of liquidator’s
duty shall be convened after all steps above is already conductedand
completed by the liquidator.In this vein,if the General Meeting of
Shareholdersgrantsthe liquidator an acquittal and discharge, then
according to Article 152 of the Company Law, the liquidator must report
to the MOLHR and announce the final outcome onthe liquidation process in
a newspaper at least 30 (thirty) days counting fromthe date of the
General Meeting of Shareholderswhich approvingthe liquidator’s
duty.Subsequently, MOLHR will register and delete the Company’sname from
the Company Registry and will announce it in State Gazette of the
Republic of Indonesia. The Company Law is silent concerning the period
of such deletion and announcement process.
The estimated time frame on dissolution process
Based on the steps to above, we estimate that the dissolution
processwill take at least 12(twelve) months from the date of approval of
General Meeting of Shareholders.This is with the assumption that during
suchperiod of time, all rights and obligations (i.e. claims and account
receivables) of the Companyto third parties are settled.
The general principle on dissolution of Limited Liability Company is stipulated under Article 143 paragraph (1) of Law No. 40 of 2007 regarding Limited Liability Company (hereinafter referred to as “Company Law”), which provides that the dissolution of company does not automatically erase the legal status of the company. The legal status would be lost at the end of the liquidation process and accountability of liquidator has been accepted by the General Meeting of Shareholder or District Cour Article 142 of Company Law elaborates that a company can be dissolute based on the following occurrence:
- Based on the resolution of General Meeting of Shareholder;
- Due to the termination of the company’s duration as stipulated in the articles of association.
- Based on the court order;
- Due to the revoked bankruptcy statement based on binding order of the commercial court, and the bankrupt assets of the company is not sufficient to pay the bankruptcy cost;
- Due to the condition that the bankrupt assets of the company has been declared in the condition of insolvency as regulated in the Law regarding Bankruptcy and the Suspension of Debt Payment; or
- Due to the revocation of the company’s business permit, so that the company is obliged to conduct liquidation in accordance with prevailing regulation.
Further elaboration on the conditions above are as follows:
(a) Dissolution based on the resolution of General Meeting of Shareholder
Article 144 of the Company Law provides that the General Meeting of Shareholder concerning dissolution can be held based on the proposal from the Board of Directors, Board of Commissioners or 1 (one) or more shareholder representing at least 1/10 (one-tenth) from the total number of shares with voting right. Moreover, the General Meeting of Shareholders’ resolution regarding the Company’s dissolution shall be valid if it is taken by mutual consensus or if it is approved by at least 3/4 (three-fourth) of the total shares issued with voting rights are present or represented, except articles of association stipulates a higher quorum and/or a provision regarding the adoption of resolution in the General Meeting of Shareholders.
(b) Dissolution based on Court Order
Article 146 of the Company Law provides that Dissolution based on District Court Order can be based on request from:
- Prosecutor’s office, based on the reason that the Company has violated the public interest or the Company has committed an action that which violating the regulation;
- relevant party, based on the reason that the deed of establishment is found to be defect;
- Shareholders, Board of Directors, or the Board of Commissioners, based on the reason that it is no longer possible to run the Company.
PROCEDURES AND MECHANISM OF DISSOLUTION OF THE COMPANY
1. Approval of the General Meeting of Shareholders
As explained above, dissolution requires a resolution from the General Meeting of Shareholders. In order to do so, Article 79 (2), Article 82 and Article 144 (1) of CompanyLaw provides thatthe Board of Directors, Board of Commissioners or 1 (one) or more shareholder of the Company who representing at least 1/10 (one-tenth) from the total number of shares with voting rightmay submit a request concerning dissolution and the appointment of liquidator(s)to General Meeting of Shareholders of the Company.
The General Meeting of Shareholders, in such agenda, is valid if it is attended by shareholders who representing at least ¾ (three-quarters) of shares with valid voting rights. In this vein, resolution of General Meeting of Shareholders is validly adoptedif such resolution is approved by at least ¾ (three-quarters) of the total votes legally cast at the General Meeting of Shareholders.This is clearly enshrined by Article 89 (1) of Company Law.
Pursuant toArticle 144 (3) of Company Law, dissolution process starts and effective since the date mentioned onthe General Meeting of Shareholders’resolution or if such resolutiondoesnot expressly statedthe date of dissolution process, the dissolution process is effectiveas of the date of the General Meeting of Shareholders’ resolution.
2. Appointment of Liquidator
Dissolution shall be followed by liquidation process which is conducted by one or more liquidator(s). This is provided by Article 142 (2) point (a) of Company Law. If the General Meeting of Shareholdersdoes not appoint a liquidator,therefore in accordance withArticle 142 (3) of Company Law, the Board of Directorsof the Companyshall act as liquidator.
3. Announcement of Liquidation
Pursuant toArticle 147 (1) of the Company Law, the liquidator within 30 (thirty) days since the effective date of the dissolution shall notify:
- All creditors concerning the dissolution by means of announcement of dissolution in a newspaper and State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia; and
- the dissolution of the Company to Minister of Law and Human Rights (“MOLHR”) to be recorded in theCompany Registrythatthe Companyis in liquidation.
- the reason and legal basis of dissolution;
- the liquidator’s name and address;
- the procedure for the submission of claims; and
- the period for submission of claims.
4. Submission of Creditors’ Claims
Article 147 (3) of Company Lawprovides that all creditors may submit their claims withina period of 60 (sixty) days calculated since the date of announcement.
5. Settlement of Claims and Accounts Receivables
Based on Article 149 (1) of Company Law, the obligation of the liquidator in settlingthe assets of the Companyin liquidation process shall be as follows:
- recording and collecting the assets and debts of the Company;
- announcement in a newspaper and State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia with regard to the plan ofdistribution of assets resulting from the liquidation of the Company;
- payment to all creditors;
- payment of the remainingassets resulting from the liquidation to theshareholders;
- other actions necessary in the settlement of assetsof the Company.
The Company Law is silent in regards tothe period of liquidation process as stated in Article 149 (1) of Company Law. However, Article 149 (3) of Company Law regulates that the period for creditors to submit an objection to the plan ofdistribution of assets is 60 (sixty) days from the announcement date.
6. General Meeting of Shareholdersconcerning Approval of Liquidator’s Duty and Effectiveness the liquidation of the Company
The General Meeting of Shareholdersconcerning approval of liquidator’s duty shall be convened after all steps above is already conductedand completed by the liquidator.In this vein,if the General Meeting of Shareholdersgrantsthe liquidator an acquittal and discharge, then according to Article 152 of the Company Law, the liquidator must report to the MOLHR and announce the final outcome onthe liquidation process in a newspaper at least 30 (thirty) days counting fromthe date of the General Meeting of Shareholderswhich approvingthe liquidator’s duty.Subsequently, MOLHR will register and delete the Company’sname from the Company Registry and will announce it in State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia. The Company Law is silent concerning the period of such deletion and announcement process.
The estimated time frame on dissolution process
Based on the steps to above, we estimate that the dissolution processwill take at least 12(twelve) months from the date of approval of General Meeting of Shareholders.This is with the assumption that during suchperiod of time, all rights and obligations (i.e. claims and account receivables) of the Companyto third parties are settled.
Corporate lawyer Kantor Pengacara Jakarta Indonesia Solicitor - Law Firm - Pengacara Jakarta
KONSULTASI HUKUM
Oleh :
SUMARNI, SH
|
Indonesia law Firm
corporate lawyer-business lawyer-divorce lawyer
|
Silahkan konsultasi masalah hukum melalui Email : sumarnilawyer@yahoo.com or sumarnilawyer7@gmail.com atau telepon ke 085348543327
Putusan
Putusan PN DENPASAR Nomor 169/Pdt.G/2015/PN Dps Tahun 2015
PT.PARTS SENTRA INDOMANDIRI, DK MELAWAN ERIC BEVAN GILLET, DK
pengacara SUMARNI, SH.,
PT.PARTS SENTRA INDOMANDIRI, DK MELAWAN ERIC BEVAN GILLET, DK
pengacara SUMARNI, SH.,
| Amar | KABUL SEBAGIAN |
| Catatan Amar | MENGADILI : DALAM EKSEPSI Menolak Eksepsi Para Tergugat Untuk Seluruhnya ; DALAM POKOK PERKARA 1. Mengabulkan Gugatan Para Penggugat Untuk Sebagian; 2. Menyatakan Tergugat I dan Tergugat II adalah Penjual yang beritikad buruk ; 3. Menyatakan Tergugat I dan Tergugat II telah melakukan Wanprestasi/ingkar janji dengan segala akibat hukum daripadanya Kepada Para Penggugat karena : - Tidak menyerahkan legalitas surat surat Villa No. 20 dan tidak melaksanakan penyerahan fisik villa No. 20 kepada Para Penggugat ; - Menjual paket Villa dan Apartemen (5 Villa dan 4 Apartemen 2 Lantai), tidak sesuai Spek Master Plan & Site Plan bangunan dan tanpa legalitas perijinan di Villa Xanadu Seminyak Kerobokan Kabupaten Badung Propinsi Bali . 4. Menyatakan batal : 4.1. Jual beli Villa No. 20 di Villa Xanadu Seminyak Kabupaten Badung Bali antara Para Penggugat dan Para Tergugat; 4.2. Jual beli Paket Villa dan Apartemen (5 Villa dan 4 Apartemen 2 Lantai), di Villa Xanadu seminyak Kerobokan Kabupaten Badung Propinsi Bali antara Para Penggugat dan Para Tergugat ; 5. Menghukum Tergugat I dan Tergugat II untuk mengembalikan kepada Para Penggugat secara tunai dan seketika uang pembelian Villa dan Apertemen di Villa Xanadu Seminyak Bali dengan rincian : 5.1. Uang pembelian Villa No.20 senilai Rp. 1.885,000,000,00 IDR (satu milyar delapan ratus delapan puluh lima juta rupiah); 5.2. Uang pembelian paket Villa dan Apartemen (5 Villa dan 4 Apartemen 2 Lantai) senilai Rp. 4.875.000.000,00, (empat milyar delapan ratus tujuh puluh lima juta rupiah) Sehingga total menjadi Rp. 1.885,000,000,00 + Rp. 4.875.000.000,00, = Rp. 6.760.000.000,- (enam milyar tujuh ratus enam puluh juta rupiah) ; 6. Menghukum Para Tergugat untuk memberikan ganti rugi atas perbuatan Wanprestasi yang dilakukan oleh Para Tergugat kepada Para Penggugat secara tunai dan seketika, berupa : Kerugian materiil berupa : - Kehilangan keuntungan 5% dari investasi yang diharapkan dari uang sebesar Rp. 6.760.000.000,- (enam milyar tujuh ratus enam puluh juta rupiah) = 338.000.000,- (tiga ratus tiga puluh delapan juta rupiah) setiap bulan terhitung sejak bulan Desember 2014, demikian jumlahnya akan semakin bertambah setiap bulannya sampai dengan putusan terlaksana dengan tuntas ; - Kehilangan bunga sebesar 5% (lima persen) Rp. 6.760.000.000,- (enam milyar tujuh ratus enam juta rupiah) atau sama dengan Rp. 338.000.000,- (tiga ratus tiga puluh delapan juta rupiah) setiap bulan, demikian jumlahnya akan semakin bertambah setiap bulannya sampai dengan putusan terlaksana dengan tuntas ; 7. Menghukum Para Tergugat untuk membayar segala biaya yang timbul dalam perkara ini, yang hingga kini ditaksir sebesar Rp. 751.000,- ( tujuh ratus lima puluh satu ribu rupiah ); 8. Menolak Gugatan Para Penggugat Selain dan Selebihnya ; |
| Putusan Terkait |
|---|
| Download Putusan dalam format zip(terkompresi) | ||
|---|---|---|
 |
Klik untuk Download | |
| Daftar Dokumen Putusan | Ukuran | |
|---|---|---|
|
169_Pdt.G_2015_PN_Dps.pdf | 1426.81 KB |
PERDATA JADI PIDANA
JUAL BELI VILLA XANADU DI BALI
Pengacara SUMARNII, SH., menggugat seorang bule australia bernama eric bevan gillet. Bahwa Pengacara SUMARNII, SH., mewakili klien yang bernama Ketut Semadi dan Tommy Comerford. bahwa pada awalnya Ketut Semadi dan Tommy Comerford, membeli paket villa dan apartemen dari eric bevan gillet. bahwa pembayaran di lakukan secara bertahap dan eric bevan gillet meyakinkan bahwa dokumen villa dan apartemen tersebut telah lengkap dan sewa tanah selama 55 tahun. bahwa eric bevan gillet juga telah memberikan gambar spek villa dan apartemen tersebut.
bahwa setelah sekian lama waktu berjalan, eric bevan gillet tidak pernah mau memperlihatkan dokumen atas villa dan apartemen tersebut, hingga akhirnya Ketut Semadi dan Tommy Comerford merasa curiga ada yang tidak benar yang dilakukan oleh eric bevan gillet.
bahwa Ketut Semadi dan Tommy Comerford akhirnya memberi kuasa ke Pengacara SUMARNI, SH., untuk mengecek dokumen dokumen villa dan apartemen tersebut ke instansi terkait di badung bali, dan hasilnya ternyata villa tersebut tidak memiliki IMB dan tidak memiliki dokumen apapun.
pengacara SUMARNI, SH., mendampingi saksi Ketut Semadi dan Tommy Comerford untuk melaporkan dugaan tindak penipuan villa bodong atas villa xanadu di seminyak bali. Pengacara SUMARNI, SH., telah melakukan upaya damai dan mediasi dengan Terdakwa Eric Bevan Gillet,namun tidak berhasil karena Terdakwa selalu berkeras untuk diselesaikan lewat jalur hukum.
bahwa pengacara SUMARNI, SH., melanjutkan upaya hukum dengan mengajukan gugatan perdata wanprestasi sekaligus menuntut secara pidana dengan melaporkan dugaan tindak pidana penipuan dan penggelapan sebagaimana dalam pasal 372 & 378 KUHP.
Bahwa Ketut Semadi dan Tommy Comerford telah membayar villa dan apartemen tersebut secara mencicil sebesar Rp. 6.7 milyar rupiah.
SURAT KUASA
Yang bertandatangan dibawah ini :
Nama :
Tempat Tanggal Lahir :
Pekerjaan :
Agama :
Alamat :
Dalam hal ini telah memilih tempat kediaman Hukum (Domicilie)
pada Kantor Kuasanya tersebut dibawah ini, menerangkan
dengan ini memberikan Kuasa kepada :
pada Kantor Kuasanya tersebut dibawah ini, menerangkan
dengan ini memberikan Kuasa kepada :
SUMARNI, SH
Para PengacaraAdvokat dan Penasehat Hukum pada Kantor SUMARNI, SH & ASSOCIATE,
alamat di MNC CENTRE, High End Building. Ground Floor Suites 102 - 104,
Jalan Kebun Jeruk No. 17-19, Jakarta 10340 - Indonesia. Hp.081254113291.Email : Sumarnilawyer@yahoo.com
http://www.advokat-sumarni.blogspot.com. Baik sendiri-sendiri maupun bersama-sama :
http://www.advokat-sumarni.blogspot.com. Baik sendiri-sendiri maupun bersama-sama :
K H U S U S
Bertindak untuk dan atas nama serta mewakili Pemberi Kuasa selakuTermohon dalam perkara No. 3/Pdt.G/2013/PA.Bpp di Pengadilan Agama Balikpapan.
Untuk itu :
Mewakili/ menghadap di Persidangan Pengadilan Agama Balikpapan guna memberikan keterangan di persidangan, menghadap semua Instansi terkait dan para Pejabat yang berwenang untuk meminta atau memberikan segala keterangan yang diperlukan, menerima dan menandatangani surat-surat, Berita Acara dan Akta, mengajukan dan memberikan Replik, Bukti-bukti, minta di dengar saksi - saksi atau menolak saksi - saksi, mengajukan Permohonan Sita Jaminan, melakukan Perdamaian baik didalam maupun diluar pengadilan dengan syarat-syarat yang dianggap baik oleh Penerima Kuasa dan mendapat persetujuan dari Pemberi Kuasa, melakukan pembayaran atau menerima uang pembayaran, meminta penetapan-penetapan, Putusan, Pelaksaaan Putusan (Eksekusi), melakukan peneguran-peneguran, membaca dan mempelajari berkas perkara, menyatakan Banding serta menandatangani dan mengajukan memori Bandingnya, Kasasi serta menandatangani dan mengajukan Kontra Memori Kasasi dan melakukan segala tindakan-tindakan yang diperbolehkan oleh Hukum yang berlaku dalam rangka perkara Pemberi Kuasa berkenaan dengan kepentingan perkaranya.
Kuasa ini diberikan dengan hak untuk melimpahkan (Substitusi) dan hak retensi, baik sebagian maupun seluruhnya yang dikuasakan kepada orang lain.
Balikpapan, 03 April 2013
Penerima Kuasa, Pemberi Kuasa,
SUMARNI, SH .............................
Menikah di Singapura
Pertanyaan :
Saya sangat bingung dengan hukum perkawinan campuran di Indonesia yang menekan hak hak wanita. Saya berencana menikah dengan warga negara Inggris (inilah Jodoh saya yang diberi Tuhan).
(1) Apabila kami menikah di Singapore akan tetapi tidak mendaftar di Kantor agama dalam waktu 1 tahun, apakah perkawinan kami diakui oleh negara (syah/tidak)?
(2) Karena kami menikah di Singapore, apakah hukum perkawinan kami harus mengikuti hukum perkawinan Singapore (mengenai properti, proses perceraian, dll.)?
(3) apakah status saya diakui sudah menikah oleh pemerintah Indonesia atau tidak?
(4) Apakah benar bahwa apabila calon suami saya akan menikahi saya di Indonesia harus membayar jaminan Rp500.000.000 (kami sangat menentang sekali seolah-olah perempuan adalah obyek uang bagi pemerintah)?
(5) Apabila kami menikah di Indonesia dan setelah menikah saya memiliki properti atas nama saya, apakah saya harus menjual properti saya tersebut dalam waktu 1 tahun?
(6) Bagaimana status kewarganegaraan saya? Mohon bantuan jawabannya, terima kasih.
Jawaban :
(1) Perkawinan yang dilangsungkan di luar Indonesia antara seorang WNI dengan seorang WNA adalah sah bilamana dilangsungkan menurut hukum yang berlaku di negara di mana perkawinan itu dilangsungkan. Dan bagi WNI tidak melanggar ketentuan Undang-Undang No. 1 Tahun 1974 tentang Perkawinan, sebagaimana diatur dalam pasal 56 ayat 1 yang berbunyi:
“Perkawinan di Indonesia antara dua orang warganegara Indonesia atau seorang warganegara Indonesia dengan warga negara Asing adalah sah bilamana dilakukan menurut hukum yang berlaku di negara dimana perkawinan itu dilangsungkan dan bagi warganegara Indonesia tidak melanggar ketentuan Undang-undang ini”
Dalam hal perkawinan tersebut akan dilakukan di negara Singapura, maka harus mengikuti aturan mengenai perkawinan yang berlaku di negara tersebut kemudian dicatatkan pada institusi Catatan Sipil setempat. Selama para pihak telah melaksanakan pencatatan perkawinan di luar negeri sesuai hukum yang berlaku di negara di mana perkawinan tersebut dilangsungkan, maka perkawinan adalah sah dengan segala akibat hukumnya. Akibat hukum di sini, misalnya status mengenai anak, harta perkawinan, pewarisan, hak dan kewajiban suami-istri bila perkawinan berakhir karena perceraian dan/atau sebagainya. Namun, untuk sahnya perkawinan yang dilangsungkan di luar negeri tersebut menurut hukum Indonesia harus dilakukan pencatatan dan pelaporan pada Dinas Kependudukan dan Catatan Sipil di Indonesia dalam kurun waktu 1 (satu) tahun dan bila lewat dari waktu yang ditetapkan tersebut harus melalui Pengadilan Negeri sesuai dengan domisili yang bersangkutan dan akan dikenai sanksi denda sesuai dengan Peraturan Daerah setempat jo. pasal 107 Peraturan Presiden No. 25 Tahun 2008 tentang Persyaratan dan Tata Cara Pendaftaran Penduduk dan Pencatatan Sipil berbunyi:
(1) “Denda administratif sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 104 ayat (2), Pasal 105 ayat (2) dan Pasal 106 diatur dalam Peraturan Daerah.
(2) Penetapan besaran denda administratif sebagaimana dimaksud pada ayat (1), dengan memperhatikan Ketentuan Undang-Undang dan kondisi masyarakat di daerah masing-masing.
(3) Denda administratif sebagaimana dimaksud pada ayat (1) merupakan penerimaan daerah Kabupaten/Kota, dan bagi Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta merupakan penerimaan daerah Provinsi.”
Pelaporan pada Dinas Kependudukan dan Catatan Sipil harus melampirkan;
a. Akta Perkawinan yang telah dilegalisasi oleh kantor perwakilan Republik Indonesia di luar negeri, dalam hal ini pada bagian Konsuler KBRI Singapore,
b. Foto kopi paspor suami-istri, dan
c. Kartu keluarga/KTP dari WNI tersebut.
(2) Sebagaimana dijelaskan di atas, selama para pihak telah melaksanakan pencatatan perkawinan di luar negeri sesuai hukum yang berlaku di negara di mana perkawinan tersebut berlangsung, maka perkawinan tersebut sah dengan segala akibat hukumnya. Dalam hal ini para pihak harus mengikuti hukum perkawinan yang berlaku di Singapura.
(3) Pertanyaan butir 3 sudah terjawab dalam jawaban pertanyaan butir 1 di atas yaitu agar perkawinan sah menurut hukum Indonesia, harus dilakukan pencatatan dan pelaporan pada Dinas Kependudukan dan Catatan Sipil Indonesia.
(4) Di Indonesia, hal ini memang sedang menjadi pembahasan di mana-mana, terkait Draft Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Hukum Materiil Peradilan Agama Bidang Perkawinan, di mana pada pasal 142 ayat (3) mengatur bahwa calon suami yang berkewarganegaraan asing harus membayar uang jaminan kepada calon istri melalui bank syariah sebesar Rp500 juta. Dan Draft RUU ini masuk dalam prioritas program legislasi nasional DPR tahun 2010. Mengingat baru merupakan RUU, tentunya ketentuan tersebut belum berlaku di Indonesia.
(5) Dalam masalah ini, para pihak pelaku perkawinan campuran yang memperoleh properti di Indonesia, berupa Hak Milik, Hak Guna Bangunan, “Strata Title”, karena pewarisan, peralihan hak melalui proses jual beli, atau percampuran harta karena perkawinan, WAJIB untuk melepaskan hak-hak tersebut dalam jangka waktu 1 tahun sejak diperolehnya hak-hak tersebut. Jika sesudah jangka waktu tersebut lewat dan hak-hak tersebut tidak dilepaskan, maka hak-hak tersebut hapus karena hukum dan tanahnya jatuh pada negara, dengan ketentuan bahwa hak-hak pihak lain yang membebaninya tetap berlangsung. Hal ini diatur dalam pasal 21 ayat (3) UU No. 5 Tahun 1960 tentang Peraturan Dasar Pokok-Pokok Agraria. Tapi, WNI pelaku perkawinan campuran dibolehkan memiliki Hak Milik ataupun Hak Guna Bangunan, dengan catatan bahwa para pihak dalam perkawinan campuran tersebut membuat perjanjian perkawinan sebelum menikah. Dengan adanya perjanjian perkawinan, maka tidak terdapat percampuran harta sehingga harta yang dimiliki oleh para pihak tersebut adalah menjadi milik masing-masing.
(6) Menurut pasal 26 ayat (3) jo. ayat (4) UU No. 12 Tahun 2006 tentang Kewarganegaraan (UU Kewarganegaraan), perempuan WNI yang menikah dengan laki-laki WNA tetap dapat menjadi WNI dengan membuat pernyataan kepada pejabat atau perwakilan Republik Indonesia di tempat kedudukannya setelah 3 (tiga) tahun sejak tanggal perkawinannya berlangsung.
@Pengadilan Negeri Balikpapan - Balikpapan Distric Court
