Building an Integrated Foreclosure Enforcement System in the Post-Auction Eviction Execution of Mortgage Rights
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15294/pandecta.v21i1.41388Keywords:
eviction execution, mortgage rights, integrated enforcement systemAbstract
The post-auction eviction execution of Mortgage Rights objects constitutes a crucial stage in the enforcement of security rights because it determines the effectiveness of the auction winner’s physical possession of the property. However, the Indonesian civil procedural law system still separates auction proceedings and eviction execution into two distinct processes, resulting in procedural uncertainty, additional litigation, and obstacles to enforcement implementation. This study aims to analyze the normative weaknesses and practical problems in the implementation of post-auction eviction execution and to formulate a reform model through the concept of an Integrated Foreclosure Enforcement System. This research employs normative legal research methods using statutory, conceptual, case, and comparative approaches. Legal materials are analyzed qualitatively through systematic, historical, and teleological interpretation. The findings indicate that the use of HIR and RBg as the legal basis for eviction execution is no longer compatible with the needs of modern foreclosure enforcement because they fail to integrate auction proceedings, transfer of rights, and physical possession of the object into a unified enforcement mechanism. Furthermore, weak institutional coordination, the absence of limitations on procedural abuse, and social resistance also contribute to the ineffectiveness of post-auction eviction execution. Based on a comparative analysis with the Netherlands and South Korea, this study proposes the concept of an Integrated Foreclosure Enforcement System emphasizing procedural integration, strengthening enforcement institutions, digitalization of execution administration, limitations on obstructive lawsuits and derden verzet, and a human-rights-based enforcement approach. Such reforms are necessary to establish a foreclosure enforcement system that is effective, certain, equitable, and supportive of the modernization of Indonesian civil procedural law.
References
Administration, International Journal for Court. “Civil Enforcement and Social Conflict Risks.” Nternational Journal for Court Administration 12, no. 1 (2020).
Ahmad Rifai. “Efektivitas Eksekusi Pengosongan Objek Sengketa Perdata.” Jurnal Hukum Prioris 7, no. 1 (2023): 45.
Andrews, Neil. “Civil Justice and Enforcement Reform.” Cambridge Law Journal 80, no. 3 (2021).
———. “Civil Procedure, Enforcement and Judicial Management.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 42, no. 1 (2022): 69.
Aparna Chandra. “Delay, Enforcement, and Civil Justice Reform in India.” Journal of Law and Courts 11, no. 2 (2023): 243.
Baldwin, John. “Measuring the Performance of Courts: Beyond Formal Justice.” Journal of Law and Society 49, no. 1 (2022): 20.
Bank, World. Doing Business. Washington DC: World Bank, 2020.
Cavallini, Daniela. “Enforcement of Civil Judgments and Fundamental Rights.” European Review of Private Law 29, no. 4 (2021).
Civil Justice Quarterly. “Civil Judgment Enforcement, Housing Evictions, and Public Trust in Courts.” Civil Justice Quarterly 41 40, no. 4 (2021).
Council, United Nations Human Rights. Forced Evictions and Human Rights. Geneva: United Nations, 2022.
Estoup, Pierre. “Reforming Civil Enforcement Systems in Europe.” European Journal of Procedural Law 14, no. 3 (2022): 233–36. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5553/EJPL/138638592022014003004.
European Court of Human Rights. “Winterstein and Others v. France,” 2013.
Jessie Hohmann. The Right to Housing: Law, Concepts, Possibilities. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2013.
Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung Nomor 7 Tahun 2012. (2012).
Marco De Benito. “Civil Enforcement Reform and Human Rights Standards.” International Review of Law 2 (2023): 28.
Mauro Cappelletti & Bryant Garth. Access to Justice: The Worldwide Movement to Make Rights Effective. Leiden: Sijthoff & Noordhoff, 1978.
Nasarre-Aznar, Sergio. “Evictions, Human Rights and Proportionality in Europe.” Journal of Property, Planning and Environmental Law 14, no. 3 (2022): 235.
Nations, United. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. New York: United Nations, 1966.
om R. Tyler, Jeffrey Fagan. “Legitimacy and the Effective Enforcement of Judicial Decisions.” Journal of Law and Courts 10, no. 2 (2022): 225.
Poeseoko, Herowati. Dinamika Hukum Parate Executie Obyek Hak Tanggungan. Yogyakarta: Aswaja Pressindo, 2013.
Project, World Justice. “Rule of Law Index.” Washington DC, 2023.
Richard A. Posner. Economic Analysis of Law. New York: Aspen Publishers, 2014.
Stefaan Voet. “Reforming Civil Enforcement in Central and Eastern Europe.” International Journal of Procedural Law 42, no. 1 (2021): 45.
Sung-Ho Kim. “Judicial Enforcement Reform in South Korea.” Asian Journal of Comparative Law 50, no. 1 (2021): 25.
Sutiyoso, Bambang. “Ruang Lingkup Dan Aspek-Aspek Pembaharuan Hukum Acara Perdata Di Indonesia.” Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM 9 (2020). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol27.iss2.art3.
Syahrial. “Pelaksanaan Eksekusi Pengosongan Di Pengadilan Negeri.” Jurnal Hukum Dan Peradilan 12, no. 2 (2023).
Thomas, Cheryl. “Strengthening Civil Enforcement in Judicial Reform.” Commonwealth Judicial Journal 31, no. 3 (2021): 304.
Uzelac, Alan. “Enforcement as the Achilles’ Heel of Civil Justice.” Uniform Law Review 27, no. 1 (2022): 10.
Uzelac, C.H. van Rhee and Alan. Enforcement and Enforceability: Tradition and Reform. Antwerp: Intersentia, 2010.
Voet, Stefaan. “Digital Transformation of Civil Enforcement Systems.” Nternational Journal of Procedural Law 44, no. 1 (2024): 67–70. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5553/IJPL/203483302024044001004.
Downloads
Published
Article ID
41388Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Michelle Tiffani, Mochamad Rizqi Zia Ulhaq, Dewi Sulistianingsih, Pujiono Pujiono (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) is an open-access license that facilitates the sharing and adaptation of creative works while ensuring proper attribution and preserving the same freedoms for derivative works. This license is designed to be user-friendly and applicable globally, making it a popular choice for a wide range of content, from academic articles to creative arts.
At its core, the Attribution component of the CC BY-SA 4.0 license requires users to give appropriate credit to the original creator of the work. This includes providing a clear citation, linking to the license, and indicating any modifications made. The attribution must be done in a way that does not imply endorsement by the creator of the new use or its creator. This ensures that the original authors are acknowledged for their contributions while allowing their work to be freely used and disseminated.
The ShareAlike aspect of the license mandates that any derivative works or adaptations created from the original must be licensed under the same CC BY-SA 4.0 terms. This means that new works based on the original content must also be freely available and shareable under the same conditions. This provision helps to promote a culture of collaboration and continuous improvement, as it ensures that all adaptations remain accessible to the public and contribute to the collective pool of knowledge and creativity.
