Minimum limit of the amount of debt that has matured and can be collected

Oct 13, 2025 by windailys.com 69 views

Analysis of the State of Not Paying Debts that Have Fallen Time and Can Be Collected in Bankruptcy Cases: Seeking Justice for Creditors

Introduction

Bankruptcy law is a complex and multifaceted field that deals with the insolvency of individuals and companies. At its core, bankruptcy law is designed to provide a framework for the resolution of debts that cannot be paid. However, the implementation of bankruptcy law in Indonesia has been marred by inconsistencies and ambiguities, particularly with regards to the concept of "not paying debts that have matured and can be collected." This article seeks to analyze the state of not paying debts in bankruptcy cases and to provide recommendations for reforming the bankruptcy law to ensure justice for both debtors and creditors.

The Concept of Insolvency in Bankruptcy Law

Insolvency is the heart of bankruptcy law, and it is the primary requirement for a bankruptcy statement. Without insolvency, the court cannot bring down the decision of the bankrupt statement. Insolvency is defined as the inability to pay debts as they become due. However, the concept of insolvency has undergone changes in Indonesian bankruptcy regulations. The Dutch East Indies Bankruptcy Regulation (FaillissementSverordening, STB, 1905 No.217 Jo STB, 1906 No.348) used the formulation of "Stopping Conditions," while Perpu No.1 of 1998 jo. Law No.4 of 1998 replaced it with "the state of not paying," and Law No.37 of 2004 uses the formulation of "The Conditions Not Paying Paid."

The Problem of Inconsistent Application of Bankruptcy Law

The bankruptcy regulations do not set a minimum limit on the amount of debtor debt to be declared bankrupt. As a result, companies that are actually still able to pay debts can be declared bankrupt as long as there are at least two creditors and one of the debts has matured and can be collected. This has led to inconsistent application of bankruptcy law, with some courts declaring companies bankrupt even when they have sufficient assets to pay their debts.

The Need for a Minimum Limit of the Amount of Debt

To avoid misuse of law and ensure justice for both parties, it is recommended that the Bankruptcy Law set a minimum limit of the amount of debt that has matured as a condition of bankruptcy statement. For example, it is regulated that the new company can be declared bankrupt if the amount of debt that has matured and can be collected reaching a minimum of 50% of the total debt. This will prevent companies from being declared bankrupt unnecessarily and will ensure that only those companies that are truly insolvent are declared bankrupt.

The Difference in the Concept "Stop Paying" and "Not Paying"

It is essential to understand the difference in the concept of "stop paying" according to FaillissementSverordening and "not paying" according to Perpu No.1 of 1998. Although both show the inability to pay, the concept of "stop paying" emphasizes more on the situation where the debtor factual stops paying debt, while the concept "Not paying" refers to the situation where the debtor is legally obliged to pay debt but fails to do it.

The Principle of Simple Proof in Bankruptcy Cases

The principle of simple proof aims to facilitate the process of proof for creditors. However, the lack of limits on the amount of debt and a clear definition of "not paying" opens a gap for the abuse of law and injustice for the debtor. To ensure that the principle of simple proof is applied fairly and consistently, it is essential to set a minimum limit of the amount of debt that has matured and can be collected.

Recommendations for Reforming the Bankruptcy Law

To ensure justice for both debtors and creditors, it is necessary to revise Law No. 37 of 2004 by entering:

Minimum limit of the amount of debt that has matured and can be collected as a condition of bankruptcy statement.
Clear and operational definitions about the concept of "not paying" which is in line with the principle of simple proof.

Conclusion

Fair and clear bankruptcy regulations will provide legal certainty and justice for all parties. By setting a minimum limit of the amount of debt that has matured and can be collected and providing clear and operational definitions about the concept of "not paying," the bankruptcy law can be more effective in solving the problem of insolvency and protecting the rights of both debtors and creditors.

References

FaillissementSverordening, STB, 1905 No.217 Jo STB, 1906 No.348
Perpu No.1 of 1998 jo. Law No.4 of 1998
Law No.37 of 2004
Indonesian Bankruptcy Regulations

Future Research Directions

Future research should focus on the implementation of the recommended reforms and the impact of these reforms on the bankruptcy law in Indonesia. Additionally, research should be conducted on the effectiveness of the principle of simple proof in bankruptcy cases and the need for further reforms to ensure justice for both debtors and creditors.
Q&A: Analysis of the State of Not Paying Debts that Have Fallen Time and Can Be Collected in Bankruptcy Cases

Introduction

In our previous article, we analyzed the state of not paying debts that have fallen time and can be collected in bankruptcy cases. We discussed the concept of insolvency, the problem of inconsistent application of bankruptcy law, and the need for a minimum limit of the amount of debt. In this Q&A article, we will answer some of the most frequently asked questions about the analysis of the state of not paying debts in bankruptcy cases.

Q: What is the concept of insolvency in bankruptcy law?

A: Insolvency is the heart of bankruptcy law, and it is the primary requirement for a bankruptcy statement. Insolvency is defined as the inability to pay debts as they become due.

Q: Why is the concept of insolvency important in bankruptcy law?

A: The concept of insolvency is important in bankruptcy law because it determines whether a company or individual is eligible for bankruptcy. Without insolvency, the court cannot bring down the decision of the bankrupt statement.

Q: What is the difference between "stop paying" and "not paying" in bankruptcy law?

A: The concept of "stop paying" emphasizes more on the situation where the debtor factual stops paying debt, while the concept "Not paying" refers to the situation where the debtor is legally obliged to pay debt but fails to do it.

Q: Why is the principle of simple proof important in bankruptcy cases?

A: The principle of simple proof aims to facilitate the process of proof for creditors. However, the lack of limits on the amount of debt and a clear definition of "not paying" opens a gap for the abuse of law and injustice for the debtor.

Q: What is the recommended reform to ensure justice for both debtors and creditors?

A: To ensure justice for both debtors and creditors, it is necessary to revise Law No. 37 of 2004 by entering:

Minimum limit of the amount of debt that has matured and can be collected as a condition of bankruptcy statement.
Clear and operational definitions about the concept of "not paying" which is in line with the principle of simple proof.

Q: What are the benefits of setting a minimum limit of the amount of debt that has matured and can be collected?

A: Setting a minimum limit of the amount of debt that has matured and can be collected will prevent companies from being declared bankrupt unnecessarily and will ensure that only those companies that are truly insolvent are declared bankrupt.

Q: What are the benefits of providing clear and operational definitions about the concept of "not paying"?

A: Providing clear and operational definitions about the concept of "not paying" will ensure that the principle of simple proof is applied fairly and consistently, and will prevent the abuse of law and injustice for the debtor.

Q: What are the next steps for implementing the recommended reforms?

A: The next steps for implementing the recommended reforms are to revise Law No. 37 of 2004 and to provide clear and operational definitions about the concept of "not paying". This will require the involvement of the government, the legislature, and the judiciary.

Q: What are the potential challenges in implementing the recommended reforms?

A: The potential challenges in implementing the recommended reforms include resistance from interest groups, lack of resources, and complexity of the bankruptcy law.

Conclusion

The analysis of the state of not paying debts that have fallen time and can be collected in bankruptcy cases highlights the need for reforming the bankruptcy law to ensure justice for both debtors and creditors. By setting a minimum limit of the amount of debt that has matured and can be collected and providing clear and operational definitions about the concept of "not paying", the bankruptcy law can be more effective in solving the problem of insolvency and protecting the rights of both debtors and creditors.

References

FaillissementSverordening, STB, 1905 No.217 Jo STB, 1906 No.348
Perpu No.1 of 1998 jo. Law No.4 of 1998
Law No.37 of 2004
Indonesian Bankruptcy Regulations