ABSTRAK

Kata Kunci: Itikad Baik, Tanggung Jawab Direksi, Kerugian Kreditor.

Penelitian ini menganalisis batas konsep itikad baik direksi terhadap kerugian kreditor dalam kepailitan serta parameter kehati-hatian direksi sebelum terjadinya kepailitan. Penelitian ini sebagai sumbangan pemikiran bagi notaris serta pelaku usaha. Metode yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif preskriptif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan konseptual, bersumber pada KUHPerdata, UU Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas, dan UU Nomor 37 Tahun 2004.

Itikad baik direksi merupakan kewajiban hukum berdasarkan prinsip fiduciary duty, duty of loyalty, dan duty of care, diatur dalam Pasal 97 UU PT. Dalam kepailitan, direksi dapat dimintai pertanggungjawaban pribadi secara tanggung renteng apabila kepailitan terjadi akibat kelalaian sesuai Pasal 104 ayat (2) UU PT. Penilaian itikad baik harus dilakukan secara objektif mencakup transparansi, profesionalitas, dan kepatuhan hukum. Norma itikad baik dalam UU PT masih abstrak sehingga penilaian bergantung pada interpretasi hakim daripada parameter normatif yang seragam.

Parameter kehati-hatian direksi tercermin dari penerapan prinsip duty of care dalam pengambilan keputusan bisnis. Direksi wajib memutuskan berdasarkan informasi memadai, pertimbangan rasional, dan memperhatikan risiko keuangan perseroan. Perlindungan business judgment rule hanya berlaku bila direksi membuktikan keputusan diambil dengan itikad baik, tanpa benturan kepentingan. Penerapan prinsip Good Corporate governance mencakup transparansi, akuntabilitas, responsibilitas, dan independensi sebagai parameter objektif penilaian kesalahan direksi. Kehati-hatian direksi tidak hanya diukur dari hasil keputusan, melainkan dari kualitas proses pengambilan keputusan secara profesional.

ABSTRACT

Keywords: Good Faith, Liability of The Board of Directors, Creditor's Loss.

This research analyzes the limit of the concept of good faith of the Board of Directors upon the creditor's loss in bankruptcy and the parameter of prudentiality of the Board of Directors prior to the occurrence of the bankruptcy. This study is is a contribution of thought to the Notaries and business actors. It employs normative legal research with prescriptive characteristic, utilizing statute and conceptual approaches, with legal resources from Civil Code, Act Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Company, and Act Number 37 of 2004. The good faith of the Board of Directors constitutes legal obligation based on the principles of fiduciary duty, duty of loyalty, and duty of care, regulated in Article 97 of Limited Liability Company Act. In the event of bankruptcy, the Board of Directors can be held liable individually and collectively if the bankruptcy occurs as consequence of ignorance pursuant to Article 104 paragraph (2) of Limited Liability Company Act. The evaluation on the good faith must carried out objectively covering transparency, professionality, and legal compliance. The norm of good faith in Limited Liability Company Act is still abstract so the evaluation is more dependent on the judges' interpretation rather than the uniform normative parameter. The parameter of prudentiality of the Board of Directors is reflected in the application of the principle of duty of care in business decision making. The Board of Directors is obliged to decide based on sufficient information, rational consideration, and taking into account the financial risks of the company. The protection of business judgment rule is only valid of the Board of Directors can prove that the decision is made with good faith, and without conflict of interest. The application of the principle of Good Corporate Governance covers transparency, accountability, responsibility, and independency as objective parameters for judging the mistakes of the Board of Directors. The prudentiality of the Board of Directors is not only measured from the results of the decisions, but also the quality of the professional decision making process.