Regulation of Nominee Deeds

Oct 13, 2025 by talynt.org 42 views

Juridical Analysis of Ownership of Land Rights Registered on Behalf of Children Sourced from the Nominee Deed (Decision Study Number: 433K/PDT/2016)

Introduction

The concept of a nominee agreement made by a notary has a wide scope, encompassing various aspects of law. A nominee agreement, in essence, is a contract that is not specifically regulated, but in practice, it is often used as an agreement by borrowing names. The existence of this nominee can have a negative impact and loss for the parties involved if the deed is continued. In this study, the main objective is to analyze the legal arrangements related to the making of a notary deed which is categorized as a deed nominee, the legal position of land rights registered on behalf of children sourced from the nominee deed, as well as analyzing the Supreme Court's decision Number 433K/PDT/2016.

Background

The use of nominee concepts in land ownership aims to maintain the confidentiality of the names and original identities of the owner of public and government attention. Although there are no specific provisions governing the making of the deed nominee, the Law on Companies (UUPT) and the Capital Market Law (UUPM) have relevant provisions regarding the nominee. The nominee agreement made by a notary has a fairly wide scope, because it contains power. Nominee, basically, is an agreement that is not specifically regulated, but in practice, it is often used as an agreement by borrowing names.

Methodology

The method used in this study is normative juridical, with a descriptive approach to analysis and data collection through library studies. The main focus of the problem examined is regarding ownership of land rights sourced from borrowing names (nominee). In practice, the legal arrangement regarding the making of a notary deed which is categorized as a nominee deed raises various legal problems. Therefore, it is important for the practice of nominee formation to be accompanied by supporting agreements that can strengthen legal relations between parties, so that this process seems legal and has a clear legal basis.

Analysis of Supreme Court Decision Number 433K/PDT/2016

Analysis of the Supreme Court Decision Number 433K/PDT/2016 shows that the Panel of Judges should be more thorough in analyzing, deciding, and declaring a decision by involving competent experts. The opinions of experts who have expertise in accordance with the context of the case can provide important guidelines in decision making. The decision generated by the court should reflect a fair legal protection for all parties involved in disputes in Indonesia.

Results

The results showed that the use of nominee concepts in land ownership aims to maintain the confidentiality of the names and original identities of the owner of public and government attention. Although there are no specific provisions governing the making of the deed nominee, the Law on Companies (UUPT) and the Capital Market Law (UUPM) have relevant provisions regarding the nominee. The nominee agreement made by a notary has a fairly wide scope, because it contains power. Nominee, basically, is an agreement that is not specifically regulated, but in practice, it is often used as an agreement by borrowing names.

Conclusion

Overall, the use of nominee in ownership of land rights needs to be regulated more firmly to reduce the negative impacts that can be caused. Involving experts in the legal process will also strengthen justice in the justice system, so that all parties involved in disputes can feel protected and recognized by their rights. In the future, it is hoped that there will be further efforts in clarifying the legal arrangements regarding the nominee of deeds in order to provide better protection for the community.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are made:

Regulation of Nominee Deeds: The government should regulate the making of nominee deeds to prevent the misuse of this concept.
Involvement of Experts: The Panel of Judges should involve competent experts in analyzing, deciding, and declaring decisions to ensure that the decisions generated by the court reflect a fair legal protection for all parties involved in disputes.
Clear Legal Basis: The practice of nominee formation should be accompanied by supporting agreements that can strengthen legal relations between parties, so that this process seems legal and has a clear legal basis.

Limitations of the Study

This study has several limitations, including:

Scope of the Study: The study only focuses on the analysis of the Supreme Court Decision Number 433K/PDT/2016 and does not cover other aspects of nominee deeds.
Data Collection: The study relies on library studies and does not involve primary data collection.
Generalizability: The findings of this study may not be generalizable to other contexts.

Future Research Directions

Future research should focus on the following areas:

Regulation of Nominee Deeds: Further research is needed to regulate the making of nominee deeds to prevent the misuse of this concept.
Involvement of Experts: Research should be conducted to explore the role of experts in the legal process and how they can contribute to the decision-making process.
Clear Legal Basis: Further research is needed to clarify the legal arrangements regarding the nominee of deeds to provide better protection for the community.

References

Law on Companies (UUPT)
Capital Market Law (UUPM)
Supreme Court Decision Number 433K/PDT/2016
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on Juridical Analysis of Ownership of Land Rights Registered on Behalf of Children Sourced from the Nominee Deed (Decision Study Number: 433K/PDT/2016)

Q1: What is a nominee agreement made by a notary?

A1: A nominee agreement made by a notary is a contract that is not specifically regulated, but in practice, it is often used as an agreement by borrowing names. The existence of this nominee can have a negative impact and loss for the parties involved if the deed is continued.

Q2: What is the purpose of using nominee concepts in land ownership?

A2: The use of nominee concepts in land ownership aims to maintain the confidentiality of the names and original identities of the owner of public and government attention.

Q3: What are the relevant provisions regarding the nominee in the Law on Companies (UUPT) and the Capital Market Law (UUPM)?

A3: Although there are no specific provisions governing the making of the deed nominee, the Law on Companies (UUPT) and the Capital Market Law (UUPM) have relevant provisions regarding the nominee.

Q4: What is the role of the Panel of Judges in analyzing, deciding, and declaring a decision?

A4: The Panel of Judges should be more thorough in analyzing, deciding, and declaring a decision by involving competent experts. The opinions of experts who have expertise in accordance with the context of the case can provide important guidelines in decision making.

Q5: What are the negative impacts that can be caused by the use of nominee in ownership of land rights?

A5: The use of nominee in ownership of land rights needs to be regulated more firmly to reduce the negative impacts that can be caused.

Q6: What are the recommendations for regulating the making of nominee deeds?

A6: The government should regulate the making of nominee deeds to prevent the misuse of this concept. The Panel of Judges should involve competent experts in analyzing, deciding, and declaring decisions to ensure that the decisions generated by the court reflect a fair legal protection for all parties involved in disputes.

Q7: What are the limitations of this study?

A7: This study has several limitations, including the scope of the study, data collection, and generalizability.

Q8: What are the future research directions?

A8: Future research should focus on regulating the making of nominee deeds, involving experts in the legal process, and clarifying the legal arrangements regarding the nominee of deeds to provide better protection for the community.

Q9: What are the references used in this study?

A9: The references used in this study include the Law on Companies (UUPT), the Capital Market Law (UUPM), and the Supreme Court Decision Number 433K/PDT/2016.

Q10: What are the implications of this study?

A10: The implications of this study are that the use of nominee in ownership of land rights needs to be regulated more firmly to reduce the negative impacts that can be caused. Involving experts in the legal process will also strengthen justice in the justice system, so that all parties involved in disputes can feel protected and recognized by their rights.