Uncertainty Regarding the Limits of the Authority of the Notary Honorary Council and Its Implications for Criminal Law Enforcement

Authors

  • E Ellyza Borobudur University
  • Natsir Asnawi Borobudur University, Jakarta, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47134/jcl.v3i3.1.5808

Keywords:

Notary Honorary Council, Article 66 of the Notary Law, authority, position protection, criminal law enforcement

Abstract

 

Article 66 of the Notary Law grants the Notary Honorary Council an important role in the mechanism for summoning and examining notaries by law enforcement officials. This regulation is intended to protect the position of notaries as public officials exercising state authority in the civil sector. However, the formulation of the norms in Article 66 indicates a lack of clarity regarding the limits of the Notary Honorary Council's authority, particularly regarding the scope of assessments that can be performed in granting approvals. This lack of clarity creates a vague norm that has implications for legal uncertainty and the potential for overlapping authority between the Notary Honorary Council and law enforcement officials in criminal proceedings. This study aims to analyze the provisions on the authority of the Notary Honorary Council in Article 66 of the Notary Law and the implications of this unclear norm on the protection of the notary's position and the effectiveness of criminal law enforcement. The research method employed is normative legal research with a statutory and conceptual approach. The results show that the absence of clear normative parameters in Article 66 leaves a space for diverse interpretations and has the potential to hinder the investigation process, while weakening the legal protection that should be provided to notaries. This situation reflects the unbalanced position between the interests of protecting one's position and the principle of due process of law. This study recommends reformulating Article 66 of the Notary Law by clarifying the limits of the Notary Honorary Council's authority and harmonizing this norm with the criminal justice system.

References

Achmad, H. &. (2025). Optimalisasi Peran Ikatan Notaris Indonesia dalam Perlindungan Hukum bagi Notaris. Al-Zayn: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial & Hukum, 3(4), 5320-5333.

Bimasakti, M. A. (2024). Permasalahan Instrumen Delegasi Kewenangan Menurut Undang-Undang Administrasi Pemerintahan. Proceeding APHTN-HAN, 2(1), 187-208.

Dewantara, Y. P. (2024). Kekuatan Pembuktian Akta Otentik dalam Perspektif Hukum Acara Perdata (Studi Kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 656 PK/Pdt/2019). Paradigma: Jurnal Filsafat, Sains, Teknologi, dan Sosial Budaya, 30(3), 24-31.

Fairuzia, H. &. (2022). Ultimum Remedium Terhadap Keterlibatan Notaris Dalam Perbuatan Melawan Hukum. Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan, 52(3), 648-656.

Fauziannor, A. R. (2025). Perbandingan kekuatan pembuktian antara akta otentik dan akta di bawah tangan dalam sengketa perdata. Indonesian Journal of Islamic Jurisprudence, Economic and Legal Theory, 3(2), 1963-1976.

Ghuto, I. P. (2024). Implikasi Hukum bagi Notaris yang Menghindari Panggilan Penyidik. Jurnal USM Law Review, 7(2), 570-585.

Gotama, A. N. (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), 3731-3742.

Harianto, D. (2024). Diskresi Majelis Kehormatan Notaris Terkait Perlindungan Profesi Notaris Dalam Perspektif Hukum Administrasi. CENDEKIA: Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan, 4(3), 286-296.

Hildawati, H. E. (2024). Sistem Administrasi Negara: Teori dan Praktik. Yogyakarta: PT. Green Pustaka Indonesia.

Jurdi, F. (2023). Pengantar hukum administrasi negara. Jakarta: Prenada Media.

Mandagie, A. P. (2022). Tinjauan Implikasi Yuridis Terhadap Akta Perdamaian Yang Dibuat Dihadapan Notaris. LEX PRIVATUM, 10(1).

Martinelli, I. R. (2023). Keterbukaan dan Kepastian Hukum dalam Teori Kontrak Roscoe Pound. UNES Law Review, 6(2), 4099-4107.

Navisa, F. D., & Sunardi. (2024). Peraturan Jabatan dan Etika Profesi Notaris: Buku Ajar Magister Kenotariatan. Gresik: Thalibul Ilmi Publishing & Education.

Qamar, N. &. (2023). Wewenang Sebagai Instrumen Penyelenggararaan Pemerintahan Dalam Sistem Negara Hukum. Asas Wa Tandhim: Jurnal Hukum, Pendidikan Dan Sosial Keagamaan, 2(2), 201-222.

Rajagukguk, E. Y. (2025). Kekuatan Alat Bukti Akta Otentik Dalam Pembuktian Perkara Perdata. Jurnal Teknologi Mesin UDA, 2(2), 195-207.

Rizky, F. K. (2024). Analisis Terhadap Etika Profesi Hukum Notaris Dalam Menjalankan Tugasnya Sebagai Pejabat Umum Dalam Pembuatan Akta Autentik. Acta Law Journal, 2(2), 94-107.

Sriwati, S. (2022). Problematika Penerapan Pasal 66 Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris terhadap Penegakan Hukum Pidana. Jurnal Reformasi Hukum, 26(1), 59-78.

Sutrsino, A. (2025). Peran Hakim dalam Mewujudkan Due Process of Law Pada Sistem Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara di Indonesia. Locus: Jurnal Konsep Ilmu Hukum, 5(1), 17-28.

Wibowo, W. S. (2022). Integritas Notaris Sebagai Pejabat Pembuat Akta Autentik dalam Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris. Recital Review, 4(2), 323-352.

Wiryawan, W. F. (2025). Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Dugaan Pelanggaran Notaris Dalam UU Jabatan Notaris Dan Etika Profesi. Syntax Idea, 7(9), 1184-1196.

Zaenal, H. K. (2022). Hakikat Persetujuan Majelis Kehormatan Notaris Sebagai Upaya Perlindungan Hukum Pada Notaris Dalam Proses Peradilan. Jurnal Hukum, Politik Dan Ilmu Sosial, 1(2), 85-94.

Zulkhainen, Q. U. (2022). Analisis Yuridis Pasal 66 Ayat (1) Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris Terhadap Pengawasan Notaris. Officium Notarium, 2(1), 120-129.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-13

How to Cite

E Ellyza, & Asnawi, N. (2026). Uncertainty Regarding the Limits of the Authority of the Notary Honorary Council and Its Implications for Criminal Law Enforcement. Journal Customary Law, 3(3.1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.47134/jcl.v3i3.1.5808

Similar Articles

<< < 1 2 3 4 5 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.