According to Article 1 paragraph 1 of the KPKPU Law, bankruptcy is a general confiscation of all assets of a bankrupt debtor, which is administered and paid by a curator under the supervision of a supervisory judge.

Basically, the civil principle is proof. Any person who has a right to an object or event must be able to prove that right. The applicant must prove the evidence of his application under the mandatory burden of proof. However, in bankruptcy cases, proof uses a simple proof system. Simple proof usually means short proof without following the procedure and proof system regulated in civil procedural law. This is one of the reasons why the examination of bankruptcy cases in the Commercial Court is faster than ordinary civil cases. Simple proof is a requirement that must be fulfilled by the applicant before they can file a bankruptcy petition. Article 8 paragraph (4) jo. Article 2 paragraph (1) of the KPKPU Law mandates simple proof as a requirement in bankruptcy cases themselves, which reads as follows:

Article 8 paragraph (4):

An application for a declaration of bankruptcy must be granted if there are facts or circumstances that prove simply that the requirements for being declared bankrupt as referred to in Article 2 paragraph (1) have been met.

Article 2 paragraph (1):

A debtor who has two or more creditors and fails to pay in full at least one debt that has become due and collectible shall be declared bankrupt by a court decision, either on his own petition or on the petition of one or more of his creditors.

The elucidation of Article 8 paragraph (4) of the KPKPU Law reaffirms the meaning of proof in simple terms: “facts or circumstances that are proven in simple terms” are the fact that there are two or more creditors and the fact that the debt is overdue and unpaid. However, the difference in the amount of debt paid by the bankruptcy respondent and the bankruptcy applicant does not preclude a declaration of bankruptcy. Although the KPKPU Law does not further regulate the application of simple proof, the applicant only needs to prove two things:

1. The existence of two or more creditors; and
2. The existence of a debt that has fallen due and unpaid.

 Then, creditors themselves are parties who have receivables against debtors that can be collected in front of the court based on agreements or laws. In fact, the law only allows debtors to go bankrupt if they have a minimum of two creditors. Concursus creditorum is the necessity of two or more creditors. This is due to the fact that the purpose of bankruptcy itself is to establish a general confiscation of all the debtor’s property, which will then be distributed to its creditors if there is no agreement or settlement at the debt meeting. In short, bankruptcy is a legal attempt to settle a debtor’s debts collectively against all of its creditors. If the debtor has only one creditor, payment of the debtor’s debt can only be made through a default civil lawsuit, but the creditor in question in this bankruptcy case may be a competing creditor or another creditor.

In bankruptcy cases, the next requirement is a debt that has matured and has not been paid. According to the KPKPU Law, debt is an obligation in the amount of money, either in local or foreign currency, either immediate or future. This debt must be fulfilled by the Debtor in accordance with the agreement or law. If that is not done, the Creditor has the right to obtain that money from the Debtor’s estate. In short, a debt is a debt caused by an agreement or law. If the debtor does not pay the debt as agreed, the debt can be collected. However, Commercial Court judges often reject bankruptcy petitions based on this proof of debt. This can happen when proving the debt is too complicated or difficult. Therefore, in a bankruptcy case, the petitioner must be able to prove that the debtor’s debt is an undisputed debt.  Therefore, debt can be proven if the debtor does not fulfill its obligations within the time period stipulated in the agreement; sanctions or fines imposed by the competent authority; or court or arbitration decisions.

In addition, circumstances where the debtor does not fulfill its obligation to pay even though the creditor has given a letter of reprimand can also be evidence of the debtor’s debt. This is in accordance with the mandate of Article 1238 of the Civil Code, which states that if the debtor with a letter of reprimand still does not fulfill his obligations in accordance with the stipulated provisions and time period, the debtor is considered negligent. Due to such negligence, the debtor’s debt can be collected.  Therefore, in bankruptcy cases, simple proof actually consists of strong evidence that the debtor has debts to its creditors that are due, collectible, and undisputed. If the simple proof requirements are met and the debtor’s matured debt is collectible, then as mandated by Article 8 paragraph (4) jo. Article 2 paragraph (1) of the KPKPU Law, the bankruptcy petition filed by the creditor must be granted.

Legal Basis:

1. Herzien Inlandsch Reglement;
2. Civil Code;
3. Law Number 37 Year 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations.

Reference:

Hukumonline.com