As a Result of the Legal Bankruptcy Law Which is Limited Due to the Act Against the Law Committed by the Board of Directors

Oct 13, 2025 by talynt.org 46 views

As a Result of the Legal Bankruptcy Law Which is Limited Due to the Act Against the Law Committed by the Board of Directors

The bankruptcy of a company, especially those in the form of limited liability companies (PT), is often triggered by acts against the law committed by the Directors. When these actions are proven to be the main cause of bankruptcy, important questions arise regarding legal responsibilities that can be imposed on the Board of Directors. Through this analysis, we will explore more deeply regarding the act against the law committed by the Board of Directors, their responsibilities, and legal considerations in the Supreme Court Decision Number 98 PK/PDT.Sus/2010 related to the bankruptcy of PT.

In the legal context, acts against the law committed by the Board of Directors can include a series of actions that are not in accordance with their obligations as company managers. For example, if the Directors ignore the responsibilities of Fiduciary, commit fraud, or carry out business activities that are detrimental to the company, then this can be considered as an act against the law. The Board of Directors has a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders, and any actions that compromise this duty can be considered as an act against the law.

The responsibility of the Board of Directors for this unlawful act usually includes the obligation to provide compensation to the company or creditors who are harmed. In cases where the Board of Directors proven guilty of actions that contribute to bankruptcy, they can be asked to be personally responsible for the losses experienced by the company. This aims to protect the interests of creditors and ensure that the directors do not let go of the consequences of their actions. The personal liability of the Board of Directors is a crucial aspect of corporate law, as it ensures that directors are held accountable for their actions and that the company and its creditors are protected.

Supreme Court Decision Number 98 PK/Pdt.Sus/2010 provides a number of important legal considerations to understand. In the decision, there was an evaluation error, where the panel of judges did not consider the main cause of the bankruptcy of PT Rasico Industry, namely the act against the law by the Board of Directors. This negligence causes the neglect of the provisions of Article 97 paragraph (3) and Article 104 paragraph (2) of the Company Law which states that the responsibilities of the Board of Directors must be included in the bankruptcy process. The Supreme Court Decision highlights the importance of considering the role of the Board of Directors in the bankruptcy process, and the need for a more thorough evaluation of their actions.

In his research, the method used is a normative and analytical-descriptive approach, with secondary data taken from various legal sources. This qualitative analysis process is important to understand the dynamics of law that play a role in bankruptcy cases. Thus, the results of the study showed that the need for a tighter application to the legal responsibility of the Board of Directors in the context of the company's bankruptcy. The analysis highlights the need for a more robust framework for holding the Board of Directors accountable for their actions, and the importance of considering the role of the Board of Directors in the bankruptcy process.

The conclusion of this analysis emphasizes the importance of awareness of the responsibilities of the Board of Directors in managing the company. If the act against the law is the cause of bankruptcy, the Board of Directors is not only responsible for the company, but also to creditors. Therefore, firm and fair law enforcement is very necessary so that similar cases do not happen in the future. The analysis highlights the need for a more robust framework for holding the Board of Directors accountable for their actions, and the importance of considering the role of the Board of Directors in the bankruptcy process.

Based on the analysis, the following recommendations are made:

The Board of Directors should be held accountable for their actions, and their responsibilities should be included in the bankruptcy process.
A more robust framework should be established for holding the Board of Directors accountable for their actions.
The role of the Board of Directors in the bankruptcy process should be considered, and their actions should be evaluated thoroughly.
Firm and fair law enforcement is necessary to prevent similar cases from happening in the future.

The study has several limitations, including:

The study is based on a single case study, and the findings may not be generalizable to other cases.
The study relies on secondary data, and the accuracy of the data may be limited.
The study does not consider the role of other stakeholders, such as shareholders and creditors, in the bankruptcy process.

Future research should focus on:

Conducting a more comprehensive analysis of the role of the Board of Directors in the bankruptcy process.
Establishing a more robust framework for holding the Board of Directors accountable for their actions.
Considering the role of other stakeholders, such as shareholders and creditors, in the bankruptcy process.
Conducting a more thorough evaluation of the actions of the Board of Directors in the bankruptcy process.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Acts Against the Law Committed by the Board of Directors

A: An act against the law committed by the Board of Directors refers to any action taken by the directors that is not in accordance with their obligations as company managers. This can include ignoring the responsibilities of Fiduciary, committing fraud, or carrying out business activities that are detrimental to the company.

A: The Board of Directors has a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders. This includes making decisions that are in the best interests of the company, managing the company's finances, and ensuring that the company is run in a responsible and ethical manner.

A: If the Board of Directors commits an act against the law, they can be held personally liable for the losses experienced by the company. This means that they can be asked to pay compensation to the company or its creditors.

A: The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in determining the responsibilities of the Board of Directors. In the case of Supreme Court Decision Number 98 PK/Pdt.Sus/2010, the court evaluated the actions of the Board of Directors and determined that they were responsible for the bankruptcy of PT Rasico Industry.

A: Considering the role of the Board of Directors in the bankruptcy process is crucial because it ensures that the directors are held accountable for their actions. This helps to protect the interests of creditors and ensures that the company is run in a responsible and ethical manner.

A: The study has several limitations, including:

The study is based on a single case study, and the findings may not be generalizable to other cases.
The study relies on secondary data, and the accuracy of the data may be limited.
The study does not consider the role of other stakeholders, such as shareholders and creditors, in the bankruptcy process.

A: Future research should focus on:

Conducting a more comprehensive analysis of the role of the Board of Directors in the bankruptcy process.
Establishing a more robust framework for holding the Board of Directors accountable for their actions.
Considering the role of other stakeholders, such as shareholders and creditors, in the bankruptcy process.
Conducting a more thorough evaluation of the actions of the Board of Directors in the bankruptcy process.

A: The study recommends that:

The Board of Directors should be held accountable for their actions, and their responsibilities should be included in the bankruptcy process.
A more robust framework should be established for holding the Board of Directors accountable for their actions.
The role of the Board of Directors in the bankruptcy process should be considered, and their actions should be evaluated thoroughly.
Firm and fair law enforcement is necessary to prevent similar cases from happening in the future.