Analisis Yuridis Pembatalan Perjanjian Perdamaian pada Kasus Kepailitan Koperasi Simpan Pinjam in Tidana (Studi Putusan Nomor 1/Pdt. Sus-Pembatalan Perdamaian/ 2022/PN Niaga Smg Jo. Nomor 10/Pdt. Sus-PKPU/2015/ PN Niaga Smg Jo. Nomor 874K/Pdt. Sus-Pailit/ 2022 Jo. Nomor 43PK/Pdt. Sus-Pailit/2022)

Abstract

The applicants filed a request for agreement cancellation, on the grounds that KSP (Savings and Loan Cooperative) of Intidana did not fulfill the contents of the settlement deed which was homologated by the Settlement Decision Number 10/Pdt/Sus-PKPU/2015/Pn. Niaga dated on December 17, 2015. Although the Cassation ruling had granted the application, the ruling of judicial review had overturned the Cassation ruling. This research discusses three problems: (1) the provisions of the law on the cancellation of homologation based on bankruptcy law in Indonesia: (2) the legal consequences of the cancellation of settlement agreement regarding the postponement of debt repayment obligations of KSP Intidana: and (3) the conformity of the cancellation process of settlement agreement of KSP intidana according to Law Number 37 of 2004 on bankruptcy and the postponement of debt repayment obligations.

This normative legal research employs legislation approach and case approach. The research data are taken from primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials.

This research confirms that the cancellation of homologation according to Indonesian bankruptcy law is regulated under Article 170 and Article 291 of Law No. 37 of 2004 on the bankruptcy and postponement of debt repayment obligations (UU KPKPU). The failure of the debtor to comply with the settlement agreement may result in bankruptcy of KSP Intidana, creating legal uncertainty for cooperative members who disagree with the cancellation. This process is considered not in accordance with the KPKPU Law and cooperative principles because the applicant has not held a Member Meeting. However, KSP Intidana has partially paid off the payment scheme, where the 5th scheme dues in January 2026.

The research recommends that, firstly, it is important for the parties to clarify the content of the settlement agreement in order to avoid differences in interpretation. Secondly, it is important for the parties involved to understand the legal consequences of the cancellation of settlement agreement, which may create legal uncertainty for members who are not involved in the approval of the cancellation. Thirdly, the amendments of KPKPU are required since the bankruptcy process and PKPU of the cooperative are still ambiguous, especially regarding the bankruptcy requirements and legal subjects who can file for bankruptcy and PKPU.