LEGAL CERTAINTY OF REAL EXECUTION OF THE DECISION OF THE CONSUMER DISPUTE SETTLEMENT AGENCY NUMBER 09/PTS/BPSK-TANGSEL/VI/2015 IS CONNECTED WITH ARTICLE 54 PARAGRAPH (3) OF LAW NUMBER 8 OF 1999 CONCERNING CONSUMER PROTECTION

Abstract

This Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection (UUPK) gives Indonesian people hope for protection on losses suffered from goods and service transaction. Particularly Article 54 paragraph (3) stated that the decision of BPSK assembly shall be final and binding, so there is no appeal and cassation in the consumer dispute resolution agency. However, to the BPSK’s decision, the Law authorizes the District Court domiciled in the area of BPSK to execute the decision of BPSK (execution). Until now, the decision of BPSK Number 09/PTS/BPSK-Tangsel/VI/2015 dated July 2, 2015 has not been executed due to the resistance against the execution judgment Number 27/PEN.EKS/2015/PN.TNG. dated 7 September 2015, by the business actor. Research method used in this writing is a empirical juridical approach that examines regulatory legislations, and judgment analysis by searching legal norms in the regulatory legislations and literature, as well as interview with consumer as the party associated with the Legal Certainty of Real Execution of Consumer Dispute Resolution Agency Decision Number 09/Pts/BPSK-Tangsel/VI/2015 Associated with Article 54 Paragraph (3) of Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection. Then, this research is a descriptive study that tries to describe the collected data, and analyze the data using legal system theory as a grand theory, legal certainty theory as a middle theory, and legal protection theory as an applied theory. The real execution of Consumer Dispute Resolution Agency decision Number: 09/PTS/BPSK-Tangsel/VI/2015 awarded on July 02