Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
[Lembaga Perbankan adalah suatu lembaga yang sangat bergantung kepada kepercayaan masyarakat. Salah satu hal yang dapat meningkatkan kepercayaan masyarakat kepada bank adalah dengan adanya peraturan mengenai rahasia bank. Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 1998 telah mengatur beberapa pengecualian rahasia bank. Pengecualian yang telah diatur tersebut dianggap belum melindungi kepentingah masyarakat secara keseluruhan, hal tersebut karena belum diaturnya pengecualian rahasia bank dalam perkara pembagian harta bersama. Oleh karena itu, penulis ingin mengetahui apakah ketentuan rahasia bank dalam Undang-Undang Perbankan dalam pelaksanaannya telah melindungi kepentingan pihak bank, nasabah penyimpan dan pasangannya serta bagaimana implikasi hukum yang berlaku bagi pihak bank setelah dikeluarkannya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi nomor 64/PUU-X/2012. Bentuk penelitian ini adalah penelitian hukum normatif dengan tipologi penelitian deskriptif analitis. Jenis data yang digunakan adalah data sekunder, teknik pengumpulan data yang digunakan adalah dengan cara studi kepustakaan dan wawancara, kemudian analisis data dilakukan dengan pendekatan kualitatif. Dari hasil penelitian, diperoleh kesimpulan yaitu ketentuan rahasia bank yang telah diatur dalam Undang-Undang Perbankan saat ini hanya melindungi kepentingan pihak bank dan nasabah penyimpan, tetapi tidak untuk pasangan nasabah penyimpan, hal ini karena belum diaturnya ketentuan mengenai pengecualian rahasia bank dalam hal pembagian harta bersama. Dengan adanya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 64/PUU-X/2012, maka pengecualian rahasia bank diluar Undang-Undang Perbankanpun bertambah. Namun, belum dikeluarkannya peraturan tertulis yang jelas oleh Otoritas Jasa Keuangan dalam pelaksanaan putusan tersebut, menimbulkan kebingungan di masyarakat dan dunia perbankan.;Banking institution is an institution that is highly dependent on public trust. One of the things that increase trust is the lack of legislation regarding bank secrecy. Banking Act number 10 of 1998 has regulated about the exceptions of bank secrecy. The exception that regulated considered does not protect the interest all of people, it is because the exception of bank secrecy in the case to divide the marital assets does not arrange. Therefore, the authors wanted to know bank secrecy provisions that has regulated in Banking Act has been protect the interests of the bank, depositors, and their partner or not, and then the implication that applicable for the bank after the constitutional court decision number 64/PUUX/2012. The form of the research is a normative research with descriptive analytical research typology. Type of data used are secondary data. Data collection techniques used, namely through the study of literature, for further analysis on the issues by using data analysis with qualitative approach. From the research, obtained the conclusion to answer the problem, namely the bank secrecy that had regulated in the Banking Act has already protect the bank and depositors interests, but it does not protect for the partner of the depositors interest, this is because the exception of bank secrecy which concern about the marital assets after divorcement doesn’t arrange. After the constitutional court decision no. 64/PUU-X/2012, the exclucion of bank secrecy increased. However, because of Otoritas Jasa Keuangan have not made a regulation regarding the implementation of that court constitutional court decision, it can cause confusion in the public and in the banking world., Banking institution is an institution that is highly dependent on public trust. One of the things that increase trust is the lack of legislation regarding bank secrecy. Banking Act number 10 of 1998 has regulated about the exceptions of bank secrecy. The exception that regulated considered does not protect the interest all of people, it is because the exception of bank secrecy in the case to divide the marital assets does not arrange. Therefore, the authors wanted to know bank secrecy provisions that has regulated in Banking Act has been protect the interests of the bank, depositors, and their partner or not, and then the implication that applicable for the bank after the constitutional court decision number 64/PUUX/ 2012. The form of the research is a normative research with descriptive analytical research typology. Type of data used are secondary data. Data collection techniques used, namely through the study of literature, for further analysis on the issues by using data analysis with qualitative approach. From the research, obtained the conclusion to answer the problem, namely the bank secrecy that had regulated in the Banking Act has already protect the bank and depositors interests, but it does not protect for the partner of the depositors interest, this is because the exception of bank secrecy which concern about the marital assets after divorcement doesn’t arrange. After the constitutional court decision no. 64/PUU-X/2012, the exclucion of bank secrecy increased. However, because of Otoritas Jasa Keuangan have not made a regulation regarding the implementation of that court constitutional court decision, it can cause confusion in the public and in the banking world.]

Abstrak :
Pertumbuhan sistem perekonomian Islam ditunjukkan dengan lahirnya praktik keuangan yang menggunakan prinsip syariah Islam, seperti Bank Syariah, dimana salah satu bentuk kegiatan usaha bank syariah adalah pembiayaan murabahah. Setiap pembiayaan murabahah selalu didahului dengan dibuatnya akad atau perjanjian antara Bank dengan nasabah. Dalam akad termuat kalusul-klausul yang berkaitan dengan pembiayaan murabahah, termasuk pilihan penyelesaian sengketa dalam hal terjadi sengketa antara bank dengan nasabah. Sengketa dalam perbankan syariah dimungkinkan untuk diselesaikan melalui Badan Arbitrase Syariah Nasional (BASYARNAS). Pokok permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah Bagaimanakah penyelesaian sengketa melalui Badan Arbitrase Syariah Nasional (BASYARNAS)? Dan Bagaimanakah putusan BASYARNAS dalam perkara PT. X dengan nasabah Y yang sesuai dengan peraturan perundanganundangan. Penelitian ini dianalisis secara preskriptif analitis dengan menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif. Dari hasil penelitian diperoleh kesimpulan bahwa penyelesaian sengketa melalui BASYARNAS tidak hampir sama dengan proses beracara di pengadilan, perbedaannya terdapat pada sistem pembuktiannya, dimana pembuktian di basyarnas bersifat tertutup, sedangkan pembuktian di lembaga peradilan pembuktiannya bersifat terbuka. Proses pemeriksaan dalam hal pembuktian, di Basyarnas lebih ditekankan kepada saksi dan ahli saja. Dalamp Putusannya, BASYARNAS menyatakan bahwa akad murabahah nomor 53 tanggal 23 februari 2003 mengandung unsur riba dan gharar sehinga akad tersebut dibatalkan, dan PT. bank X dinyatakan wanprestasi. ......The growth of Islamic economic system is indicated by the birth of financial practices using the principle of Islamic law, such as the Islamic Bank, where one of the business activities of Islamic banks is murabaha financing. Each financing murabaha is always preceded by a contract or agreement made between the Bank and the customer. Kalusul-contained in the contract clause relating to the financing murabaha, including the choice of dispute resolution in the event of a dispute between the bank and its customers. Disputes in Islamic banking is possible to be settled through the National Sharia Arbitration Board (BASYARNAS). The main problem in this research is How the settlement of disputes through the Arbitration Board of the National Sharia (BASYARNAS)? And How BASYARNAS verdict in the case of PT. X with Y customers in accordance with laws and regulations. This research analyzed using analytical prescriptive normative juridical approach. From the research we concluded that the settlement of disputes through BASYARNAS not nearly the same as the proceedings in the court, there are differences in the systems of proof, where proof in Basyarnas are closed, while the proof of evidence in judicial institutions are open. The inspection process in terms of proof, in Basyarnas more emphasis to the witnesses and experts alone. DalampPutusannya, BASYARNAS stated that murabahah number 53 dated 23 February 2003 contain elements of usury and gharar so that the contract is canceled, and PT. bank X is declared in default.

Abstrak :
Skripsi ini membahas tentang kedudukan dari Otoritas Jasa Keuangan berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 21 Tahun 2011 tentang Otoritas Jasa Keuangan dalam hal pengaturan dan pengawasan perbankan di Indonesia. Penataan kembali struktur pengorganisasian yang lebih terintegrasi diperlukan terhadap lembaga-lembaga yang menjalankan fungsi pengawasan pada industri perbankan maupun industri keuangan bukan bank sehingga dapat tercapai mekanisme koordinasi yang efektif dan dengan demikian dapat tercapai stabilitas sistem keuangan. Lembaga yang terintegrasi ini oleh pemerintah dilahirkan dalam bentuk Otoritas Jasa Keuangan. Pokok permasalahan yang dibahas dalam penelitian ini adalah kedudukan dan keberadaan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan sebagai Lembaga Pengatur dan Pengawas Perbankan di Indonesia serta mekanisme koordinasi antara Otoritas Jasa Keuangan dengan Bank Indonesia dalam hal pengaturan dan pengawasan bank. Bentuk penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif dengan melakukan studi dokumen dan menggunakan metode analisis data secara kualitatif. Penelitian menunjukan bahwa didasarkan pada Pasal 1 ayat (1) UU OJK yang menyebutkan bahwa Otoritas Jasa Keuangan adalah lembaga yang independen dan bebas dari campur tangan pihak lain, yang mempunyai fungsi, tugas, dan wewenang pengaturan, pengawasan, pemeriksaan, dan penyidikan serta memiliki kedudukan diluar pemerintah. Koordinasi antara OJK dengan BI telah diatur dalam Pasal 39 UU OJK, yaitu dalam membuat peraturan pengawasan di bidang perbankan meliputi: kewajiban pemenuhan modal minimum bank, sistem informasi perbankan yang terpadu, kebijakan penerimaan dana dari luar negeri, penerimaan dana valuta asing dan pinjaman komersial luar negeri, produk perbankan, transaksi derivatif, kegiatan usaha bank lainnya dan penentuan institusi bank yang masuk kategori systemically important bank serta data lain yang dikecualikan dari ketentuan kerahasiaan. ......This thesis discusses the position of the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan pursuant to Act No. 21 of 2011 on the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan in terms of regulation and supervision of banking in Indonesia. Restructuring required a more integrated organization of institutions that perform the function of oversight in the banking industry as well as non-bank financial industry so as to achieve effective coordination mechanism and thus can achieve the stability of the financial system. This integrated institution born by the government in the form of the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan. The main problems discussed in this study is the status and whereabouts of the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan as a Regulatory and Supervisory Institute of Banking in Indonesia as well as the coordination mechanism between the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan and Bank Indonesia in terms of regulation and supervision of banks. This research is a form of normative documents and by conducting studies using qualitative methods of data analysis. Research shows that based on Article 1 paragraph (1) of the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Act which states that the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan is an independent body and free from interference by other parties, which have the functions, duties, and powers of regulation, supervision, inspection, and investigation and have a position outside the government. Coordination between the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan and Bank Indonesia has been provided for in Article 39 of Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Act, namely in making banking supervision regulations include: minimum capital obligations of banks, banking information system that is unified, policy receipt of funds from abroad, receipt of foreign currency funds and external commercial borrowing country, banking products, derivative transactions, banking activities and the determination of other banking institutions are categorized as systemically important banks as well as other data are excluded from the provisions of the confidentiality of the information.

Abstrak :
Skripsi ini membahas mengenai penggunaan jasa debt collector oleh Bank X dalam melakukan penagihan kartu kredit macet yang saat ini merupakan salah satu keluhan tertinggi masyarakat sebagai konsumen kartu kredit. Adapun yang dibahas dalam penulisan ini adalah mengenai dasar hukum pengaturan debt collector itu sendiri ditinjau dari hukum perbankan dan perlindungan hukum para card holder serta bentuk penyelesaian sengketa terhadap perbuatan melawan hukum yang sering kali dilakukan oleh debt collector. Hasil dari penelitian ini menyimpulkan pengaturan mengenai debt collector terdapat didalam PBI APMK dan SEBI APMK. Mengenai perlindungan hukum card holder dapat kita temukan dalam UU Perlindungan Konsumen dan UU Perbankan, serta bentuk penyelesaian sengketa dapat dilakukan melalui pengaduan nasabah kepada bank, mediasi perbankan, arbitrase, gugatan perdata ke pengadilan negeri, maupun laporan adanya tindak pidana ke kepolisian. ...... This thesis discusses the use of the services of debt collectors by X Bank in collecting bad credit card that currently is one of the highest public complaints as consumer credit cards . As discussed in this paper is the legal basis for debt collector itself in terms of banking law and the legal protection of the card holder and its dispute resolution of tort is often done by the debt collector . Results of this study concluded arrangements regarding debt collectors contained in PBI APMK and SEBI APMK . Regarding legal protection of card holder can be found in the Consumer Protection Act and the Banking Act , as well as forms of dispute resolution can be done through customer complaints to the bank , banking mediation , arbitration , civil lawsuit to court, as well as reports of criminal acts to the police.