| Summary: | In order to do their position as public official obtaining authority by state
to make authentic deed, notary in doing their work should meet job and
responsibility as stipulated in Law on notary and Notary code of conduct. Not few
notary in doing their task and position get criminal sanction in relation to deed
they made. This research emphasized base of judge consideration against notary
in deed falsification criminal action, where there is possibility of privilege conduct
for notary in examination process in court.
It is normative empirical research that study law principles related to
notary responsibility in criminal action of deed falsification and supported with
field data to obtain primary data. Data collected was analyzed with qualitative
method.
The result on consideration of judge decision given to notary that is proved
doing deed falsification in district court decision number 48/Pid.B/2003/PN YK is
being formally and materially proved by hearing and seeing explanation from the
accused, witnesses and proof presented. Based on the judge decision in appeal
level to reexamination level, decision made in first level have agreed with existing
law and sanction given is fair according to guiltiness of the accused. Therefore,
there is not disparity between appeal decision and reexamination decision. Legal
implication of notary that is proved doing criminal action of deed falsification
depend on deed he made, so notary cannot be sued with criminal law.
|
|---|