Legal Implications of Article 66 of Law Number 2 of 2014 Concerning the Position of Notary in the Summoning of Notaries by Investigators
Abstract
The notary, as a public official, plays a vital role in upholding legal certainty through authentic deeds. However, notaries in Indonesia are vulnerable to legal uncertainty when summoned by investigators in criminal proceedings without proper adherence to legal procedures. Article 66 of Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning the Position of Notary mandates that any summons by investigators must first obtain written approval from the Notary Honorary Council (Majelis Kehormatan Notaris/MKN) to protect the notary's independence and the confidentiality of their duties. This research formulates two main problems: the effectiveness of Article 66 in providing legal protection to notaries in Malang City and the alignment of its implementation with the principles of legal certainty and protection. The study aims to evaluate the actual practice of Article 66 in the field and identify influencing factors. Using an empirical legal research method with a qualitative descriptive approach, data were obtained through in-depth interviews with notaries, investigators, and relevant officials, supported by secondary legal materials. The findings reveal that the implementation of Article 66 is still inconsistent. Several notaries in Malang were summoned without prior MKN approval, which contradicts the law and undermines notarial legal protections. Factors affecting effectiveness include lack of coordination, limited understanding among law enforcers, and procedural ambiguity. The study concludes that although Article 66 is normatively protective, its practical application remains problematic and requires systemic improvements.
Downloads
References
Adjie, H. (2008). Hukum Notaris Indonesia: Tafsir Tematik Terhadap Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 tentang Jabatan Notaris. Refika Aditama.
Ananda, R. (2022). The Role of The Notary Regional Supervisory Board in Responding to Violations of Notary Duties and Positions. Indonesia Private Law Review, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.25041/iplr.v3i2.2684
Avianti, G. (2023a). Legal Analysis of Cracking Down on Violations of Notary Code of Ethics According to Law No. 2 of 2014. QISTINA: Jurnal Multidisiplin Indonesia, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.57235/qistina.v2i2.770
Avianti, G. (2023b). Legal Analysis of Cracking Down on Violations of Notary Code of Ethics According to Law No. 2 of 2014 concerning Amendments to the Notary Position Law. QISTINA: Jurnal Multidisiplin Indonesia, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.57235/qistina.v2i2.770
Azhari, T., Dwi Kusuma, T. K., & Leviza, J. (2022). Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 20/PK/Pid/2020 terkait Pemanggilan Notaris. Jurnal Hukum Dan Kenotariatan.
Diba, G. F. (2022). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Para Pihak Akibat Perbuatan Tindak Pidana Yang Dilakukan Oleh Notaris. Journal of Legal Research, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.15408/jlr.v4i2.25412
Erwiningsih, W., & Ali, M. (2023). Notary and Legal Arrangement of Criminal Law: Legal Protection for Notaries Facing Criminal Cases. Corporate Law & Governance Review, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.22495/clgrv5i2sip1
Friedman, L. M. (1975). The Legal System: A Social Science Perspective. Russell Sage Foundation.
Gotama, A. (2023). Analisis Yuridis Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Notaris Sebagai Pejabat Umum dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Terkait Kewenangan Membuat Akta Otentik (Studi Penelitian Di Kota Batam). UNES Law Review, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.31933/unesrev.v6i1.1172
Maya, H. (2017). Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Notaris sebagai Pejabat Umum. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum.
Pradnyan, P. W. P. M. (2021). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Jabatan Notaris Berdasarkan Pasal 66 UUJN Setelah Lahirnya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Nomor 49/PUU-X/2012.
Pratama, Y. (2020). Dampak Absennya Regulasi Fiktif Positif dalam Hukum Administrasi Negara Pasca UU Cipta Kerja. Jurnal Hukum Administrasi Negara.
Radbruch, G. (1932). Gesetzliches Unrecht und übergesetzliches Recht. Süddeutsche Juristenzeitung.
Rahardjo, S. (2006). Hukum Progresif: Hukum yang Membebaskan. Kompas.
Rizky, M. (2020). Pendekatan Konseptual dalam Penelitian Hukum. Prenadamedia Group.
Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2014). Penelitian Hukum Normatif: Suatu Tinjauan Singkat. Rajawali Pers.
Sriwati. (2020). Problematika Penerapan Pasal 66 Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris terhadap Penegakan Hukum Pidana.
Zaki, M., & Saidin, S. (2022). Legal Protection and Law Assistance to Notary. Samarah: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Dan Hukum Islam, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.22373/sjhk.v8i2.17276
Copyright (c) 2025 Triana Dewi Cahyaningrum, Nurini Aprilianda, Hariyanto Susilo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
