Page 59
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025 - (59-71)
p-ISSN 2980-4868 | e-ISSN 2980-4841
https://ajesh.ph/index.php/gp
Notary Position Violations Regarding the Signing of a Cooperation Agreement
Deed Outside the Notary's Jurisdiction
Fiola Ramadhanti1*, Arsin Lukman2
Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia
Emails: fiolaramadhanti@gmail.com1, fx_arsin@yahoo.com2
ABSTRACT
Notaries, as public officials, are entrusted with the authority to create written evidence in the form of
notarial deeds, as regulated by the Notary Position Law. This law serves as a guideline for notaries in
issuing notarial deeds and performing their professional duties. This research aims to analyze the violation
of professional conduct committed by a notary in signing a Cooperation Agreement Deed outside the
notary's designated office area, with a focus on the Decision of the Notary Supervisory Panel Number
05/PTS/MPWN Prov. West Java/IV/2024. Additionally, it examines the considerations of the Notary
Supervisory Panel in addressing such violations and their implications for the notary's responsibilities. The
research employs a doctrinal approach, utilizing secondary data collected through literature and
document studies. The findings indicate that the violation committed by a notary in signing a Cooperation
Agreement Deed outside the notary's office area can compromise the authenticity of the deed, raising
questions about its legal validity. This research has significant implications for the practice of notarial law,
emphasizing the importance of adhering to the Notary Position Law to ensure the authenticity and legal
enforceability of notarial deeds. The results also highlight the need for stricter oversight and clearer
guidelines by supervisory panels to prevent similar violations and maintain the integrity of the notarial
profession.
Keywords: Violation of Notary Position, Deed of Cooperation Agreement, Territory of Position.
INTRODUCTION
Indonesia is a country that has a lot of diversity in religion, culture, and society (Sasauw,
2015). This is what makes the many differences that arise between one community and another.
These differences lead to different perspectives, ways of behaving, and desires that often differ
between one group of people and another, so they often trigger a clash of desires and do not
infrequently trigger a conflict. Therefore, the role of law is needed to help the welfare of society
and a country so that if there are differences, these differences do not become a problem that
can trigger conflict because there is a legal role that regulates it so that the role of law in a country
and society is very important and often a country applies the concept of law in its state hierarchy,
one of which is Indonesia (Asshiddiqie, 2011).
Fiola Ramadhanti, Arsin Lukman
Page 60
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
Indonesia is a state of law, as stated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia,
which indirectly states that Indonesia is a state of law (Purwanto & Mangku, 2016). As a state of
law, it is appropriate to have legal awareness in society and the state. In addition, citizens and
state administrators, in this case, must obey and comply with the rules and laws that apply in
Indonesia (Rais, 2022). As a state of law, of course, it requires a strong and well-organized legal
system and, of course, has good state administrators and public officials because one of the
purposes of the law is to harmonize one individual with another so that the ideals of a nation can
be achieved (Asshiddiqie, 2011).
Speaking of public officialsthe Indonesian state recognizes 3 (three) public officials: auction
officials, Land Deed Officials or PPATs and notaries. The three public officials have been directly
authorized by law to carry out their positions as public officials (Adjie & Agustini, 2022). The
authority given by the law is about making authentic deeds related to legal acts and agreements
that can later be accounted for by the party making the authentic deed, namely the authorized
public official. Based on this, to help the certainty of law, the role of legal officials is needed, one
of which is the role of notaries, who have an important role in legal traffic, especially in making
evidence (Asshiddiqie, 2011). The development of notaries in Indonesia began during
colonialism, namely in the 17th century. However, in that century, the notary's position was not
yet independent because the notary was still considered an employee of the VOC (Selenggang,
2018).
Along with the development of time, the presence of the First Instruction and the Second
Instruction, in essence in Article 1 of the Second Instruction, states that basically, notaries are
public employees, so they are obliged to know the provisions of the applicable laws. This indicates
that the presence of notaries in Indonesia began to be recognized, which was then supported by
the birth of the Notary Position Regulation in Indonesia or what is commonly referred to as the
Notary Reglement or Staatsblad 1860 in 1860 as the juridical basis for the implementation of the
position and authority of notaries in Indonesia, then followed by the presence of the Notary
Position Regulation which strengthened the existence of notaries in Indonesia, furthermore, on
October 26, 2004, Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Notary Position (hereinafter referred
to as the "JN Law") was born, which, originated from the 1945 Constitution (hereinafter referred
to as the "1945 Constitution") and indicates that the notary position is an office that is directly
mandated by the 1945 Constitution so that the ideals and prosperity of the Indonesian nation
are achieved (Gunarto et al., 2019). In 2004, Law No. 2 of 2014 on the Amendment to Law No. 30
of 2004 on the Position of Notary (hereinafter referred to as the "JN Law") was enacted, which
strengthened the juridical basis and existence of notaries in Indonesia in carrying out their
positions.
The law also states that notaries are public officials. The state appoints a public official to
carry out some of the state's public functions in civil law (Melinda & Djajaputra, 2021). One
expert, G.H.S Lumban Tobing, argues that a notary is a public official.
Notary Position Violations Regarding the Signing of a Cooperation Agreement Deed Outside the Notary's
Jurisdiction
Page 61
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
"Public officials who are given the sole authority by the state to make authentic deeds
regarding all actions, stipulations or agreements required by law from interested parties
who wish to state the event or legal action into an authentic deed." (Silalahi, 2019).
This is by the provisions in Article 1 number 1 of the JN Law, which states, in essence, that
notaries are public officials who are given direct authority to make authentic deeds and other
authorities that have been regulated in the JN Law. Because notaries are public officials, they
should perform duties and roles related to the implementation of their positions, such as making
authentic deeds and agreements desired by the law by the provisions of the JN Law (Talita &
Ratna, 2023).
The presence of the JN Law as a guideline for notaries in carrying out their positions creates
rights and obligations for notaries as public officials. The authority of a notary, according to one
legal expert, Yahya Harahap, is "a notary has the authority to determine a matter that is
happening before his eyes related to the facts that occur which he then obtains so that the deed
he makes can be straightened out to be more appropriate." In addition, the JN Law has regulated
notary authority, notary obligations, and prohibitions in carrying out their positions. The
authority possessed by a notary is regulated by the provisions of Article 15 of the JN Law, which
states if:
"Notaries are authorized to do authentic deeds regarding all deeds, agreements, and
provisions required by laws and regulations and or desired by those concerned to be stated
in an authentic deed to ensure the certainty of the date of doing the deed, to keep the deed,
to provide a gross, copy and quotation of the deed, all insofar as the making of deeds is not
also assigned or excluded to other officials or other persons stipulated by law."
Based on the previous explanation, the authority of a notary is to do an authentic deed
regarding legal acts such as agreements, acts and stipulations that have been regulated by law
or by the interests of the party who will do an authentic deed which is then set out in the form
of an authentic deed (Rossalina, 2016). In addition, the agreement or determination is poured
into the form of a deed to be able to guarantee the certainty of the date of making the deed,
store the deed, provide a grosse, copy and also quote the deed as long as the authority to make
the deed is not given the authority to make it to officials or other people whom the applicable
law has determined. In essence, a notary is authorized to make authentic deeds related to acts
and agreements stipulated by law, where in making an authentic deed a notary in his authority
has the right to determine what kind of legal acts and include legal facts occur that are then
poured into an authentic deed so that the deed he makes can be accounted for in the future. In
addition to doing authentic deeds, notaries are authorized to certify signatures, record letters
under the hand and provide legal counselling related to making deeds to parties who will do
deeds.
The Civil Code (hereinafter referred to as the "Civil Code") in Article 1868 regulates
authentic deeds where an authentic deed is a deed made in the form prescribed by law, made
Fiola Ramadhanti, Arsin Lukman
Page 62
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
before a public official authorized to make deeds where the deed is made (Subekti &
Tjitrosudibio, 1999). In preparing a deed, a notary must have broad insight into the current laws
and regulations; besides that, a notary must know the developments in society so that the public
interest and legal certainty can be achieved. If, in the making of an authentic deed, the notary
does not follow the provisions in the law, the deed does not become authentic. Namely, it
becomes a deed under the hand, so the deed can become null and void.
Notaries are authorized to make deeds related to land and deeds of auction minutes. In
addition to these two deeds, notaries are authorized to make deeds in their original form. The
meaning of deed in the original is a deed that is not made with deed minutes because the original
deed already has the signatures of the confronts and witnesses. Besides that, the notary has
submitted the original deed directly to the confrontants as interested parties, so it does not
become part of the notary protocol. The deed in the original is a deed of cash payment offer, a
deed of protest against non-payment or non-receipt of securities, a deed of power of attorney, a
deed of certificate of ownership, a deed of payment related to pension, rent, interest, then other
deeds that have been determined by law. Furthermore, notaries are also authorized to make a
Deed of Cooperation Agreement. A deed of Cooperation Agreement is a deed containing various
agreements and agreements that have been agreed upon by the parties so that by making it into
an authentic deed by a notary, the objectives and agreements of the parties can be achieved and
ensure legal certainty between the parties who make it (Oktasa, 2021).
A notary, in carrying out his obligations, must act honestly, carefully, and independently,
safeguard the interests of the parties who will make a deed, keep the contents of the deed
confidential and make a deed accompanied by the deed minutes as stated in Article 16 of the JN
Law. In carrying out his/her position,, a notary must also pay attention to the prohibitions
stipulated in the provisions of the law. The prohibition of notaries is regulated in Article 17 of the
JN Law, which states that notaries are prohibited from doing other work contrary to the norms,
decency and provisions of laws and regulations. Besides that, notaries are prohibited from
concurrently serving as civil servants, advocates, or state officials, becoming substitute notaries,
and becoming Land Deed Officials outside the notary's office area. Then notaries are prohibited
from carrying out positions outside and leaving their office area for 7 (seven) consecutive working
days without valid reasons. Based on this, the law expressly regulates that a notary, in carrying
out his position, must be in accordance with the designated area of the office where he was
appointed and sworn in (Melinda & Djajaputra, 2021).
The office of a notary is an area covering the entire territory of the province where he is
domiciled, and a notary also has his domicile, namely in the regency and city; this is regulated in
Article 18 of the JN Law. Therefore, a notary is provided with provisions by the JN Law that must
have 1 (one) office by his domicile. He must follow the notary's domicile if authorized as a Land
Deed Official or PPAT. Suppose the notary performs his position outside the designated office
area and is not by his domicile. In that case, he has committed a prohibition determined by law
Notary Position Violations Regarding the Signing of a Cooperation Agreement Deed Outside the Notary's
Jurisdiction
Page 63
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
so that sanctions can be imposed, such as written warnings, temporary dismissal, respectful
dismissal and the most severe sanction is dishonourable dismissal. Therefore, in carrying out their
positions, notaries should follow the provisions in the JN Law to maintain the good name of a
notary as a public official.
Notaries in their positions are supervised by the authorized minister, namely the Minister
of Law and Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as "Menkumham"). However, in conducting
such supervision, the MOLHR does not act alone; it forms the Notary Supervisory Council to help
supervise notaries in their positions. The Notary Supervisory Council is authorized to examine,
propose sanctions and impose sanctions on notaries violating the JN Law, Code of Ethics and
other regulations. The Notary Supervisory Council, based on Article 1 point 6 of the JN Law, is a
body that is authorized and must provide guidance and supervision of notaries. The Notary
Supervisory Council is divided into 3 (three) namely the Regional Supervisory Council, the
Regional Supervisory Council and the Central Supervisory Council where all three have their
respective roles, authorities and obligations that have been regulated in the JN Law and the
Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation.
As public officials, notaries, in carrying out their positions, should follow the provisions of
the JN Law, the Notary Code of Ethics and other applicable regulations. However, in carrying out
their positions, there are parties who carry out their positions as notaries not in accordance with
the provisions in the law and do not comply with the code of ethics, so they do things that should
not be done by notaries, such as committing violations of notary positions in the Decision of the
Regional Supervisory Council Number Notary Number 05/PTS/MPWN Prov. West Java/IV/2024.
In the decision a quo, KK is the Director of PT SJS as the Complainant reported Notary MT is a
notary domiciled in Bogor Regency as the Respondent on February 21, 2024. The basis for filing
the complaint report by the Complainant to the Regional Supervisory Council of Bogor Regency
was because the Complainant KK made a Deed of Cooperation Agreement in November 2024
with Mr CNP, but the signing of the Deed of Cooperation Agreement Number 16 was carried out
outside the area of office of Notary MT, which was signed in the East Jakarta area. Therefore, KK,
who felt aggrieved and worried about the authenticity of the Deed of Cooperation Agreement
Number 16, filed a report to the Notary Supervisory Panel.
Based on the previous background, as a public official, it is appropriate for a notary to carry
out his/her position in making authentic deeds in accordance with the applicable provisions to
maintain the dignity and maintain the good name of the notary. However, in the Regional
Supervisory Council Decision Number Notary 05/PTS/MPWN Prov. West Java/IV/2024, Notary
MT in carrying out his position did not follow the applicable provisions, causing losses to KK as
the Complainant. In addition, other legal facts were found where the Deed of Cooperation
Agreement Number 16, which should have been explained in the deed if the deed was made on
October 21, 2021, was actually stated to have been made on November 30, 2020. The purpose
of this research is to analyze the violation of office committed by Notary MT as stipulated in the
Fiola Ramadhanti, Arsin Lukman
Page 64
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
Decision of the Regional Supervisory Council Number Notary 05/PTS/MPWN Prov. West
Java/IV/2024. The benefit of this research is to contribute to the development of legal science,
especially in the field of notary law, by providing an in-depth analysis of notary violations and
their impact on the validity of authentic deeds. Practically, this research is expected to serve as a
guideline for notaries in carrying out their duties professionally and in accordance with the rule
of law, as well as provide input to the Notary Supervisory Council and related agencies in
conducting more effective supervision to prevent future violations of office.
RESEARCH METHOD
This Research uses a doctrinal approach. Doctrinal Research contains a normative
character, and the direction of doctrinal Research is a set of norms that are systematically
reviewed regarding legal rules, laws and regulations, which then analyze the relationship
between one regulation and another (Muhdar, 2019). This research analyzes the violation of the
notary position associated with the Decision of the Regional Supervisory Council Decision
Number Notary Number 05/PTS/MPWN Prov. West Java/IV/2024). The object under research is
a problem in society and state officials related to violations of the notary position in making a
Cooperation Agreement Deed, so it requires Research to be able to answer research problems.
The type of data used in this Research is secondary data obtained through literature studies and
laws and regulations relevant to this research problem (Soekanto, 2017). The legal materials used
are primary, secondary, and tertiary. The primary legal materials used are the Civil Code, JN Law,
and Permenkumham Number 61 of 2020. Secondary legal materials used are books that discuss
notaries, journals, and scientific articles related to this Research, namely violations of office by
notaries in doing deeds (Sunggono, 2016). Tertiary legal material in this research , which is meant
by tertiary legal material, is the online version of the Big Indonesian Dictionary regarding
violations of notary positions. The method used in this Research to analyze data is qualitative
data analysis based on laws and regulations related to notaries.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Violation of Notary Position Toward Signing the Deed of Cooperation Agreement Outside the
Notary Position Area in the Decision of the Regional Supervisory Panel of Notary Number
05/PTS/MPWN Prov. West Java/IV/2024
Notaries, as public officials who serve the public, should follow the provisions stipulated by
the JN Law and applicable laws so that they reflect themselves as public officials and can be a
reflection of the community (Nola, 2016). In the decision a quo, Notary MT is a notary domiciled
in Bogor Regency with an office area of West Java Province. However, in the decision, Notary MT
issued a Deed of Cooperation Agreement Number 16 dated November 30, 2020, with
Complainant KK at the Complainant's office in Cipinang, East Jakarta.
Notary Position Violations Regarding the Signing of a Cooperation Agreement Deed Outside the Notary's
Jurisdiction
Page 65
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
Based on this, it is true that Notary MT, in this case, is a notary who has the authority to
make authentic deeds in accordance with the provisions of Article 15 of the JN Law, which states
that notaries are authorized to make authentic deeds as long as the authority to make such deeds
is not given to other officials. The notarial deed itself is an authentic deed whose process of
making and issuing is carried out in front of and made by a notary in accordance with the
provisions in the JN Law; this is in accordance with the provisions in Article 1 number 7 of the JN
Law. The deed made by Notary MT is a Deed of Cooperation Agreement containing the
agreements and will of the Complainant KK and the CNP Party. Notary MT is indeed authorized
to make the deed, but in this case, he did not pay attention to the provisions contained in the
law that prohibited notaries from carrying out positions outside their area of office.
Article 17, letter a of the JN Law states that "notaries are prohibited from carrying out
positions outside their area of office." Based on the explanation of the article, in this case, the
Notary MT did a notarial deed outside of her office area. Notary MT is a notary domiciled in Bogor
Regency and has an area of office, namely throughout the territory of West Java Province, but in
this case, in fact, the deed made by Notary MT was signed in Cipinang, East Jakarta, at the office
of Complainant KK and not at the office of Notary MI. Therefore, Notary MT has committed a
prohibition prohibited by law against notaries in carrying out their positions.
Notary MT has also violated the provisions in Article 19 paragraph (2) of the JN Law, which
states that "notaries are not authorized to regularly carry out their offices outside their domicile."
Based on the explanation of the article, a notary is not authorized to carry out his/her position
outside the designated domicile. Meanwhile, the Deed of Cooperation Agreement Number 16
made by Notary MT was signed in Cipinang, East Jakarta, whose area of office covers the Special
Capital Region of Jakarta. Supposedly, Notary MT is only authorized up to the area of office
covering the entire territory of West Java Province and is not authorized to carry out his position
in DKI Jakarta because it is not the area of office of Notary MT.
In addition to violating the provisions in the JN Law, Notary MT also violated the provisions
in Article 16 letter l of the JN Law, which states that "in carrying out his/her position, a notary is
obliged to read out the deed in front of the confrontation in the presence of 2 (two) witnesses
and signed at the same time by the confrontation, witnesses, and notary." Based on this
explanation, a notary is obliged to read out the contents of the deed in front of the witnesses of
the deed and sign immediately in front of the notary and at the same time by the witnesses,
notary and the confrontants. Notary MI, in fact, carried out his position as a notary outside his
area of office where the deed was not signed in front of Notary MT and was signed outside the
MT notary office, namely in the East Jakarta area, and the confronts were not all present and also
did not give power of attorney to anyone where the confronts who were present were
Complainant KK while Mr CNP was not present and did not give power of attorney at the signing
of the deed, even though Mr CNP's name was included in the deed as an interested party.
Fiola Ramadhanti, Arsin Lukman
Page 66
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
Based on this, the Deed of Credit Agreement Number 16 was not read out in front of the
parties and witnesses by Notary MI and was not signed immediately by the parties at the same
time (Wicaksono, 2021). Supposedly, the signing of the deed must be done at the same time and
immediately signed in front of the notary after the notary has finished reading the deed in front
of the notary and witnesses. Furthermore, the Deed of Cooperation Agreement Number 16 was,
in fact, signed by Mr. CNP in the Denpasar area. Complainant KK, in this case, sent the deed that
had been signed by Notary MT and Complainant KK in Cipinang, which was then sent by
Complainant KK to Denpasar, Bali which was clearly outside the office area of Notary MT.
Therefore, Notary MT did violate the provisions in Article 17 of the JN Law regarding the
prohibition of notaries.
In addition to violating Article 17 of the JN Law, Notary MT's actions have also violated the
provisions in Article 1868 of the Civil Code, which states that "an authentic deed is a deed in the
form prescribed by law made or in the presence of public servants authorized to do so in the
place where the deed is made" (Sasauw, 2015). Based on the explanation in the article, there is
an element of "before the public servants who are authorized to do so in the place where the
deed is made." Notary MT, in this case, is indeed authorized to make authentic deeds but is only
authorized in the area of his office. In this case, Notary MT has violated the place of domicile and
area of office as a notary because he carried out his position outside his working area, and the
signing of the deed was carried out in DKI Jakarta, while his area of office is West Java Province.
The next violation of office committed by Notary MT is based on the decision of the Notary
Regional Supervisory Council Number 05/PTS/MPWN Prov. West Java/IV/2024 is a new legal fact
found where Notary MT made the Deed of Cooperation Agreement Number 16 not in accordance
with the proper date, where the date of the deed was made later than the date it should have
been or backdated. In the Deed of Cooperation Agreement Number 16, it is written that the date
of making the deed is November 30, 20220, whereas the date on the deed should have been
October 21, 2021. Therefore, Notary MT has committed a violation of office by making the deed
not in accordance with the facts and in this case, Notary MT violates the provisions in Article 16
paragraph (1) letter a, which states that: "in carrying out his/her position, a notary is obliged to
act honestly, carefully, independently, impartially, and safeguard the interests of the parties
involved in legal acts." Therefore, the making of the backdated deed, in the opinion of this
Research, violates the obligations of a notary where a notary should act honestly when carrying
out his/her position, especially with regard to the deeds he/she makes.
The aforementioned actions that have been carried out by Notary MT risk the evidentiary
power of the authentic deed made by the notary. A notarial deed should be an authentic deed
that has perfect evidentiary power so that it can guarantee legal certainty if it is made in
accordance with applicable laws and regulations. However, if it is made without following the
applicable regulations, it is feared that the notarial deed can be degraded into an underhand
deed until the deed is considered to have never existed. This is in accordance with the provisions
Notary Position Violations Regarding the Signing of a Cooperation Agreement Deed Outside the Notary's
Jurisdiction
Page 67
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
in Article 84 of the JN Law, which states, in essence, that a notarial deed can have evidentiary
power as a deed under the hand until it is null and void, causing harm to the parties concerned.
Based on the previous explanation, Notary MT has committed a violation of office in the
form of signing the Deed of Cooperation Agreement Number 16, which was carried out outside
the territory of his position. Besides that, Notary MT has issued the Deed of Cooperation
Agreement Number 16 with a backdate date that violates the obligations specified by the JN Law,
Code of Ethics and other applicable regulations; besides that, it has also committed a violation of
office as a notary.
Consideration of the Panel on Violation of the Position of Notary towards Making a Deed of
Cooperation Agreement Outside the Notary Position Area in the Decision of the Regional
Supervisory Panel for Notary Number 05/PTS/MPWN Prov. West Java/IV/2024
The Notary Supervisory Council assists the MOLHR in supervising the exercise of office by
notaries so that their dignity can be maintained. Furthermore, on February 21, 2024,
Complainant KK filed a complaint report to the Regional Supervisory Council (hereinafter referred
to as "MPD") of Bogor Regency for the actions committed by Notary MT as the Reported Party.
Then, it was continued to the Regional Supervisory Council (hereinafter referred to as "MPW")
of West Java Province to be given a decision on whether to impose sanctions or not. This is in
accordance with the authority stipulated in Article 73 of the JN Law, which basically states that
the MPD is authorized to receive reports and examine reports in addition to having the authority
to impose sanctions of oral or written warnings or only propose sanctions to the MPW or the
Central Supervisory Assembly.
In the Decision of the Regional Supervisory Council of Notaries Number 05/PTS/MPWN
Prov. West Java/IV/2024, after a report was submitted by Complainant KK to the Bogor Regency
MPD, the basis for reporting if Notary MT committed a violation of the code of ethics. Therefore,
MPD Bogor Regency conducted an examination as outlined in Minutes Number:
001/II/MPDNREK/2024 dated February 06, 2024. Furthermore, the MPD of Bogor Regency
continued this matter to the MPW of West Java Province, which was then examined by the West
Java Notary Regional Examination Panel, followed by summoning the Complainant KK and the
Reported Notary MT. At this examination stage, new legal facts were found where Notary MT
admitted that the signing of the deed was not in front of and not at Notary MT's office, but the
signing was carried out at Complainant KK's office in East Jakarta. However, Notary MT did not
know if the deed would be sent to Denpasar for CNP to sign. Based on the description of the legal
facts above, the MPW of West Java Province decided the Decision of the Notary Regional
Supervisory Council Number 05/PTS/MPWN Prov. West Java/IV/2024 with the following ruling:
1. Reported MT violated Article 17 paragraph (1) letter a of the JN Law, namely performing an
office outside the notary office area.
2. Punish Notary MT with a written warning.
Fiola Ramadhanti, Arsin Lukman
Page 68
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
Based on the previous description, Notary MT is correct in violating Article 17 paragraph
(1) letter a of the JN Law regarding the prohibition of notaries, which basically states that a notary
may not carry out positions outside his/her area of office. In this case, Notary MT is a notary
domiciled in Bogor Regency and has an office area covering the entire territory of West Java
Province, while the Cooperation Agreement Deed was signed on November 30, 2020, in the
Cipinang area, East Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, therefore Notary MT violated Article 17 paragraph (1)
letter a of the JN Law. Therefore, the panel's reasoning stating that Notary MT violated Article 17
paragraph (1) letter a of the JN Law is correct.
MPW West Java Province also sanctioned Notary MT with a written warning. In fact, there
are 4 (four) types of sanctions that can be given to notaries who are proven to have violated the
JN Law and the Code of Ethics. The lightest sanction is the sanction of verbal and written
warnings; then there is a sanction of temporary dismissal for 3 (three) months and 6 (six) months,
then there is a sanction of honourable dismissal, and the fourth is the most severe sanction,
namely the dishonourable dismissal of the notary from his position (Sihite, 2023). However,
based on the decision quo, Notary MT was given a written warning sanction. This is in accordance
with the provisions in Article 17 paragraph (2) of the JN Law, which basically states that if a notary
is proven to have committed a prohibition prohibited in the JN Law, the notary can be sanctioned,
one of which is a written warning. Because Notary MT committed a prohibition in the form of
carrying out the position of notary outside of his domicile so that he committed a violation of his
position as a notary, the basis for the panel's consideration to impose the sanction on Notary MT
was correct.
Based on Article 5 paragraph (1) letter c of the Regulation of the Minister of Law and Human
Rights Number 61 of 2016 concerning Procedures for Imposing Administrative Sanctions Against
Notaries (hereinafter referred to as "Permenkumham Number 61 of 2016") which states that:
"The Regional Supervisory Council may impose a written warning sanction on a notary in the
event that the notary commits a prohibition in carrying out his/her position as a Notary in
accordance with the provisions of Article 17 paragraph (1) of the Law." Based on this, the MPW
of West Java Province sentenced Notary MT to a written warning sanction is appropriate and in
accordance with its authority.
This Research argues that actually, Notary MT did not only commit a violation of office by
violating Article 17 of the JN Law regarding prohibitions, but Notary MT also violated Article 16
of the JN Law regarding obligations, namely Notary MT did not act honestly in carrying out his
position. In addition, the panel's consideration in the decision a quo also did not further consider
the making of the Deed of Cooperation Agreement Number 16, which was, in fact, made
backdate where the deed should have been issued on October 21, 2021, but in the deed a quo
was issued on November 30, 2020. The legal facts have also been supported by the statements
of the Complainant and the Reported Party during the examination session conducted before the
Notary Position Violations Regarding the Signing of a Cooperation Agreement Deed Outside the Notary's
Jurisdiction
Page 69
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
issuance of this decision so that Notary MT should have violated the provisions in Article 15 of
the JN Law regarding notary authority, but the panel did not consider the articles above.
This research argues that if the violation of office was committed by Notary MT in the
decision of the Regional Supervisory Council for Notary Number 05/PTS/MPWN Prov. West
Java/IV/2024 not only committed prohibitions made by law, but Notary MT also committed
violations of office against the authority of notaries and obligations as notaries in carrying out
their positions.
CONCLUSION
The conclusion in this study reaffirms the important role of the Notary Position Law as the
main guideline for notaries in carrying out their duties. However, the case of Notary MT, as
outlined in the Regional Supervisory Council Decision Number 05/PTS/MPWN Prov. West
Java/IV/2024, illustrates a significant violation of the UUJN. Notary MT violated Article 17 of the
UUJN by signing the Deed of Cooperation Agreement No. 16 outside her jurisdiction, namely in
East Jakarta and Denpasar, Bali, even though her jurisdiction was only in West Java Province. In
addition, a serious violation of Article 15 occurred when the deed was issued with a signature
that was no longer valid, thus reducing its authenticity and legal certainty. These violations not
only jeopardize the integrity of the notary profession, but also highlight the urgent need for
stricter adherence to regulations to maintain public trust and uphold the legal validity of
authentic deeds.
The Regional Supervisory Council (MPW), despite having given a written reprimand to
Notary MT for violation of Article 17, did not give an equally significant sanction to the violation
of Article 15, namely regarding the use of backdating in deeds. This inconsistency in sanctioning
raises concerns about the overall enforcement of professional standards and accountability of
notaries. Going forward, this research contributes to the discourse on improving the regulatory
framework governing notaries, emphasizing the need for clear and enforceable guidelines to
comprehensively address similar violations. Future research could explore the impact of
violations such as backdating on the validity of deeds and propose reforms to strengthen
oversight mechanisms, ensure notary compliance, and maintain public trust in the notarial
system.
Fiola Ramadhanti, Arsin Lukman
Page 70
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
REFERENCES
Adjie, H., & Agustini, S. (2022). Kode Etik Notaris Menjaga Isi Kerahasian Akta yang Berkaitan Hak
Ingkar Notaris (UUJN Pasal 4 ayat 2). Jurnal Hukum Dan Kenotariatan, 6(1), 1–21.
Asshiddiqie, J. (2011). Gagasan negara hukum Indonesia. Makalah Disampaikan Dalam Forum
Dialog Perencanaan Pembangunan Hukum Nasional Yang Diselenggarakan Oleh Badan
Pembinaan Hukum Nasional Kementerian Hukum Dan.
Gunarto, H., Bachrudin, H., & Soponyono, H. E. (2019). Hukum Kenotariatan: Membangun Sistem
Kenotariatan Indonesia Berkeadilan.
Melinda, S., & Djajaputra, G. (2021). Pembuatan Akta Notaris Di Luar Wilayah Jabatannya
Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 Tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-
Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 Tentang Jabatan Notaris. Syntax Literate; Jurnal Ilmiah
Indonesia, 6(7), 3521–3541.
Muhdar, M. (2019). Penelitian Doktrinal dan Non-Doctrinal. Kaltim: Mulawarman University
Press.
Nola, L. F. (2016). Peluang Penerapan Cyber Notary Dalam Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di
Indonesia. Negara Hukum: Membangun Hukum Untuk Keadilan Dan Kesejahteraan, 2(1),
75–101.
Oktasa, S. (2021). Tanggung Jawab Notaris Dalam Pembuatan Akta Perjanjian Kerjasama (Putusan
Majelis Pengawas Wilayah Notaris Provinsi Dki Jakarta Nomor: 08/PTS/MJ. PWN. PROV.
DKI. JAKARTA/IX/2020). Indonesian Notary, 3(4), 17.
Purwanto, H., & Mangku, D. G. (2016). Legal Instrument of the Republic of Indonesia on Border
Management Using the Perspective of Archipelagic State. International Journal of
Business, Economics and Law, 11(4), 51–59.
Rais, M. T. R. (2022). Negara Hukum Indonesia: Gagasan Dan Penerapannya. Jurnal Hukum
Unsulbar, 5(2), 11–31.
Rossalina, Z. (2016). Keabsahan Akta Notaris Yang Menggunakan Cyber Notary Sebagai Akta
Otentik. Brawijaya University.
Sasauw, C. (2015). Tinjauan Yuridis Tentang Kekuatan Mengikat Suatu Akta Notaris. Lex Privatum,
3(1).
Selenggang, C. S. (2008). Profesi Notaris Sebagai Pejabat Umum di Indonesia. Makalah
Disampaikan Pada Program Pasca Sarjana Kampus Untuk Mahasiswa/Mahasiswi
Magister Kenotariatan Angkatan 2008.
Sihite, C. F. (2023). Akibat Hukum Bagi Notaris Yang Dijatuhi Sanksi Administratif Oleh Majelis
Pengawas Notaris. Jurnal Notarius, 2(1).
Silalahi, D. S. (2019). Tanggung Jawab Notaris Atas Kerugian Para Pihak Terhadap Akta Yang
Dibuatnya.
Soekanto, S. (2017). Penelitian hukum normatif: Suatu tinjauan singkat.
Subekti, R., & Tjitrosudibio, R. (1999). Kitab undang-undang hukum perdata.
Sunggono, B. (2016). Metodologi Penelitian Hukum. Rajawali Pers.
Talita, D. V. M., & Ratna, E. (2023). Peran Notaris Sebagai Pejabat Umum Dalam Era Revolusi
Industri 4.0. Notarius, 16(2), 870–881.
Notary Position Violations Regarding the Signing of a Cooperation Agreement Deed Outside the Notary's
Jurisdiction
Page 71
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health
Volume 4, No. 1 January 2025
Wicaksono, W. A. (2021). Tinjauan Yuridis Penandatanganan Akta Notaris Yang Waktunya Tidak
Dilakukan Bersamaan Oleh Para Penghadap Dihadapan Notaris (Studi Kasus di Kabupaten
Cirebon). Universitas Islam Sultan Agung (Indonesia).
Copyright holder:
Fiola Ramadhanti, Arsin Lukman (2024)
First publication right:
Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health (AJESH)
This article is licensed under:
