Rethinking Concurrent Creditor Protection in Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31000/ijlp.v5i2.15932Keywords:
Concurrent Creditors, Litigation Costs, Distributive Justice, PKPUAbstract
The current practice of Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) in Indonesia reveals a distributive justice anomaly that disadvantages petitioning creditors. A “free-rider†phenomenon has emerged, whereby passive creditors obtain equal or even more favorable treatment without bearing litigation costs or the substantial legal risks associated with initiating proceedings. This inequity is exacerbated by settlement schemes that tend to marginalize initiating creditors through excessive postponement of payment schedules. This study aims to deconstruct the application of the Pari Passu Pro Rata Parte principle when applied without regard to litigation cost contributions, and to formulate a more equitable framework of legal protection for petitioning creditors as initiators of the restructuring process. The research employs a normative juridical method, utilizing conceptual and statutory approaches to evaluate the consistency between bankruptcy procedures and the values of distributive justice. The findings indicate that the absence of a litigation cost recovery mechanism generates structural injustice within the PKPU framework. From a legal standpoint, the petitioner’s financial burden and procedural initiative should be recognized as prioritized costs within the settlement plan. In conclusion, the PKPU regime requires policy redefinition to ensure financial protection for petitioning creditors, prevent exploitation by passive creditors, and preserve the integrity of commercial law enforcement.References
Ali Murtadho, N. (2024). Perlindungan hukum terhadap kreditor preferen dalam pemberesan proses kepailitan. Journal of Contemporary Law Studies, 1(4), 207–226. https://doi.org/10.47134/lawstudies.v2i3.2499
Aprita, S., & Qosim, S. (2022). Optimalisasi wewenang dan tanggung jawab hakim pengawas dalam hukum kepailitan di Indonesia. Jurnal Ius Constituendum, 7(2), 192–206. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v7i2.3963
Arifah, R. N., & Adam, A. S. (2022). Legal protection of concurrent creditors for debts not guaranteed by property rights according to bankruptcy law and Islamic law. AT-TURAS: Jurnal Studi Keislaman, 9(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.33650/at-turas.v9i1.3398
Boustanifar, H., Cerqueiro, G., & Penas, M. F. (2015). The redistributive effects of debtor protection laws. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2576039
Buchheit, L. C. (2018). The pari passu fallacy—Requiescat in pace. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3108862
Cheng, E. K., Edelman, P. H., & Fitzpatrick, B. T. (2021). Distributing attorney fees in multidistrict litigation. Journal of Legal Analysis, 13(1), 558–594. https://doi.org/10.1093/jla/laab002
Dirgantara, F., Putra, A. R., Darmawan, D., Khayru, R. K., & Wibowo, A. S. (2022). Peran hukum kepailitan dan penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang (PKPU) dalam penyelesaian sengketa utang piutang di Indonesia. Lexstricta: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.46839/lexstricta.v4i1.1444
Epstein, E. (2022). The need for dignitary justice for tort creditors in Chapter 11 bankruptcy. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4066762
Fatimatuz Zahroh, Sarumaha, N. M., & Nugroho, L. D. (2024). Perlindungan hukum kreditur konkuren melalui mekanisme gugatan lain-lain dalam UU No. 37 Tahun 2004. Deposisi: Jurnal Publikasi Ilmu Hukum, 2(4), 69–81. https://doi.org/10.59581/deposisi.v2i4.4202
Ho, L. C. (2016). Equity and insolvency. In Equity and administration. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316529706.006
Flandreau, M. (2022). Pari passu lost and found: The origins of sovereign bankruptcy 1798–1873. Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper Series. https://doi.org/10.36687/inetwp186
Galperin, M. L., & Kostsov, V. N. (2025). The sunset of the success fee, or arithmetic and economics of justice. Zakon, 22(4), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.37239/0869-4400-2025-22-4-29-38
Irwanti, K., & Sitoresmi, A. S. (2019). Permohonan penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang dan akibat hukum terhadap PT Asmin Koalindo Tuhup. Pandecta, 14(2), 119–127. https://doi.org/10.15294/pandecta.v14i2.16902
Jimmy, A., & Adiasih, N. (2022). Argumentasi hukum hakim dalam putusan No. 29/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2020/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst. Jurnal Hukum PRIORIS, 10(2), 139–162. https://doi.org/10.25105/prio.v10i2.17017
Kenting, Y. A., & Parulian, H. D. (2022). Kedudukan kreditor separatis terhadap rencana perdamaian dalam PKPU. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Alethea, 5(2), 91–110. https://doi.org/10.24246/alethea.vol5.no2.p91-110
Lubben, S. J. (2015). The overstated absolute priority rule. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2581639
Maryono, A. S., Afwa, U., & Nurhasanah, S. R. P. (2022). Quo vadis esensi lembaga PKPU pasca Putusan MK No. 23/PUU-XIX/2021. Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis, 3(4), 247–268. https://doi.org/10.56370/jhlg.v3i4.246
Morgan-Knapp, C. (2022). Fairness, individuality, and free riding. The Philosophical Quarterly, 72(4), 940–959. https://doi.org/10.1093/pq/pqab075
Ngantung, V. Y. (2025). Kedudukan kreditor asing pemegang cessie dalam proses PKPU dan kepailitan di Indonesia. Jurnal Globalisasi Hukum, 2(2), 298–319. https://doi.org/10.25105/jgh.v2i2.23320
Qin, J., Yang, X., He, Q., & Sun, L. (2021). Litigation risk and cost of capital: Evidence from China. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2020.101393
Saputra, R., Triana, J. Y., & Afrita, I. (2025). Akibat hukum terhadap kreditur dalam PKPU berdasarkan UU No. 37 Tahun 2004. Yustitia, 11(1), 86–96. https://doi.org/10.31943/yustitia.v11i1.320
Sari, E. P., & Kongres, E. (2023). Kepastian hukum terhadap proses PKPU pasca Putusan MK No. 23/PUU-XIX/2021. Jurnal Hukum Magnum Opus, 6(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.30996/jhmo.v6i1.7391
Sihotang, B., & Naiborhu, M. I. (2025). Tinjauan penerapan UUK-PKPU terhadap hak kreditor pemegang hak tanggungan. Collegium Studiosum Journal, 8(1), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.56301/csj.v8i1.1650
Sofia, A. N. (2020). Kedudukan hak suara kreditor preferen dalam persetujuan rencana perdamaian PKPU. Jurist-Diction, 3(4), 1415–1432. https://doi.org/10.20473/jd.v3i4.20213
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
The Authors submitting a manuscript do so on the understanding that if accepted for publication, the copyright of the article shall be assigned to Indonesian Journal of Law and Policy Studies, Post Graduate in Law Universitas Muhammadiyah Tangerang, Indonesia as the publisher of the journal.
Indonesian Journal of Law and Policy Studies (IJLPS) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under  Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the work for any purpose, even commercially with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in Indonesian Journal of Law and Policy Studies (IJLPS). Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in Indonesian Journal of Law and Policy Studies (IJLPS). Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).