A Verstek Decision is a decision in which the judge is given the authority to examine and decide the case even though the defendant/defendants are not all present at the hearing on the specified date and do not ask another party to represent them even though they have been properly summoned. And it is stated in Article 125 HIR, Article 149 paragraph (1) RBg , and Article 78 Rv , as follows:

Article 125 HIR

If the defendant does not appear on the day the case is heard, or does not send someone else to appear on his behalf, even though he has been properly summoned, then the lawsuit will be accepted by absenteeism (verstek), unless it is clear to the district court that the accusation is against the rights or is unreasonable. .

Article 149 paragraph (1) RBg

If on the appointed day the defendant does not appear even though he has been duly summoned, and also does not send his representative, then the lawsuit is granted without his presence (verstek) unless it turns out according to the district court that the lawsuit has no legal basis or is groundless.

Article 78 RV

If the defendant does not appear after the deadline and procedural rules have been fulfilled, then the decision is handed down without the presence of the defendant and the plaintiff is granted, unless the judge considers the lawsuit to be without rights or without legal basis.

The forms of Verstek Decisions that can be handed down by the court (M. Yahya Harahap) are:

1. Granted All Claims.

As long as the petitum of the lawsuit is truly in accordance with the arguments of the lawsuit and the arguments of the lawsuit have a strong, objective and rational legal basis, then the judge can grant the lawsuit in its entirety. [1]

Verstek verdict who grant all claims must be based on the following conditions (Retnowulan):

1. The defendant or defendants all failed to appear on the appointed hearing day;
2. He/She or they do not send their authorized representative/proxy to appear;
3. He/She or they have all been properly called;
4. Petitum is not against rights;
5. Petitum reasoned.

• Granted Part of the Claim.

In the event that there are sufficient reasons to grant part of the claim, the judge is free and authorized to grant only part of the claim. [2] For example, the plaintiff (creditor) asks a third party who is not a party to the debt and receivable agreement to be sentenced to pay the debt together with the defendant (debtor). The claim against the third party clearly violates the values of justice and is contrary to the law, so the judge can only grant some specific claims against the debtor and reject the claims against the third party.

• Declaring the Lawsuit Inadmissible.

The judge can declare the claim inadmissible if the claim is against the law or order and decency and is unreasonable or has no legal grounds. [3] Apart from that, there is also a formal error in the lawsuit, for example the lawsuit is filed with a court that does not have the authority to hear it, the lawsuit is filed by someone who is not entitled to it, the attorney who signed the lawsuit letter does not have a special power of attorney from the plaintiff, then the lawsuit is declared invalid. acceptable (niet ontvankelijke verklaard). Regarding such a decision, at a later date the plaintiff can still file his lawsuit again because the judge has not examined the subject matter of the case.

• Rejecting the Lawsuit.

A verstek decision occurs if the judge considers that the lawsuit submitted is not supported by evidence that meets the minimum threshold of proof, so that the judge can hand down a verstek decision containing the dictum rejecting the plaintiff’s claim. [4] Therefore, rejection of the plaintiff’s lawsuit will eliminate the plaintiff’s right to file a lawsuit again a second time and the decision will be ne bis in idem based on Article 1917 of the Civil Code . If the plaintiff objects to the judge’s decision, he can file an appeal and cassation. [5]

So it can be concluded that the verstek decision does not mean granting all of the plaintiff’s claims and benefit the plaintiff.

Because judges in examining cases do not just resolve disputes in the interests of the plaintiff or defendant, but the central point is the interests of justice .

Even though the defendant is not present, the panel of judges will ex officio study the contents of the lawsuit seriously to assess whether the lawsuit meets the formal and material requirements so that a decision can be made by granting the entire lawsuit, granting part of the lawsuit, declaring the lawsuit unacceptable, or rejecting it. lawsuit.

Verstek’s legal remedy is by verzet or resistance. Article 129 paragraph (1) HIR states that a defendant who is sentenced while he is not present (verstek) and does not accept the decision, can challenge the decision.Opposition or verzet can only be submitted by the parties in the case and may not be carried out by third parties. [6]

Legal basis:

1. Herzien Inlandsch Reglement ;
2. Regulations for Buitengewesten ;
3. Reglement op de Rechtvordering ;
4. Code of Civil law .

Reference:

1. I Rubini and Chidir Ali. Introduction to Civil Procedure Law. Bandung: Alumni, 1974;
2. M. Yahya Harahap. Civil Procedure Law regarding Lawsuits, Trials, Confiscation, Evidence and Court Decisions. Second Edition. Second printing. Jakarta: Sinar Graphics, 2019;
3. Retnowulan Sutantio and Iskandar Oeripkartawinata. Civil Procedure Law in Theory and Practice. Revised Edition. I-print. Bandung: Mandar Maju:Bandung, 2019.
4. Hukumonline.com.