Reconstruction of Substitute Notary Authority under Article 33 of Law Number 2 of 2014 to Ensure Legal Certainty

Muhammad Rosa Sya’roni, Ngesti Dwi Prasetyo, Novitasari Dian Phra Harini

Abstract


The regulation of Substitute Notary authority under Article 33 of Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning the Amendment to Law Number 30 of 2004 on the Position of Notary raises a problem of legal certainty because Article 33(2) applies the provisions on authority, obligations, and prohibitions of permanent Notaries to Substitute Notaries without expressly defining the substantive limits attached to the temporary nature of the office. This study aims to analyze the legal implications of this regulatory structure and formulate a reconstruction of Substitute Notary authority capable of providing greater legal certainty. The study employs normative legal research using statutory and conceptual approaches. Primary and secondary legal materials are analyzed through grammatical, systematic, and constructive interpretation. The findings reveal that the principal problem is not the absence of authority, since Substitute Notaries obtain statutory authority through Article 33(2), but the incomplete normative relationship between their temporary legal status, different appointment requirements, scope of authority, validity of notarial acts, and allocation of legal responsibility. This regulatory incompleteness may generate different interpretations concerning the boundaries of authority and responsibility, particularly where a notarial process is initiated by a permanent Notary and continued by a Substitute Notary. The study proposes an integrated reconstruction of Article 1 point 3, Article 33(2), and Article 65 of the Notary Office Law by expressly positioning the Substitute Notary as a temporary public official, clarifying the temporal, territorial, substantive, and functional limits of authority, and allocating responsibility proportionally according to the legal acts performed by each office holder. This reconstruction is intended to strengthen normative clarity, regulatory consistency, predictability, and legal protection in Indonesian notarial practice.


Keywords


Authentic Deed; Authority; Legal Certainty; Notary Law; Substitute Notary

Full Text:

PDF

References


Arsawan, I. G. Y., & Cahyono, A. B. (2021). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Klien Atas Pembuatan Akta Di Hadapan Notaris Pengganti Yang Tidak Sah. Acta Comitas: Jurnal Hukum Kenotariatan, 6(3), 535–548. https://doi.org/10.24843/AC.2021.v06.i03.p6

Budiono, A., Sugiarto, D. P. A., & Zuhdi, S. (2023). Legal Protection for Notaries in Making Authentic Deeds in Indonesia. Journal of Judicial Review, 25(1), 111–124. https://doi.org/10.37253/jjr.v25i1.7612

Erwinsyahbana, T., & Melinda, M. (2018). Kewenangan Dan Tanggung Jawab Notaris Pengganti Setelah Pelaksanaan Tugas Dan Jabatan Berakhir. Lentera Hukum, 5(2), 305–321. https://doi.org/10.19184/ejlh.v5i2.7339

Flora, H. S. (2012). Tanggung Jawab Notaris Pengganti Dalam Pembuatan Akta. Kanun Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 14(2), 179–199.

Gangga, M. D., & Putra, I. P. R. A. (2023). Kekuatan Pembuktian Akta Autentik Yang Dibuat Oleh Notaris Pengganti. Acta Comitas: Jurnal Hukum Kenotariatan, 8(3), 549–559. https://doi.org/10.24843/AC.2023.v08.i03.p12

Harnum, E., & Khisni, A. (2017). Perbedaan Kewenangan Dan Syarat Tata Cara Pengangkatan Antara Notaris Dan Notaris Pengganti. Jurnal Akta, 4(4), 509–514. https://doi.org/10.30659/akta.v4i4.2491

Hutchinson, T., & Duncan, N. (2012). Defining and Describing What We Do: Doctrinal Legal Research. Deakin Law Review, 17(1), 83–119. https://doi.org/10.21153/dlr2012vol17no1art70

Lifante-Vidal, I. (2020). Is Legal Certainty a Formal Value? Jurisprudence, 11(3), 456–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/20403313.2020.1778289

Magdaline, T. S., & Aminah. (2025). Urgensi Pembatasan Kewenangan Notaris Pengganti Dalam Pembuatan Akta Pendirian Koperasi. Acta Comitas: Jurnal Hukum Kenotariatan, 10(3), 478–488. https://doi.org/10.24843/AC.2025.v10.i03.p2

Mahadewi, I. G. A. I. L., & Purwanto, I. W. N. (2021). Tanggung Jawab Notaris Pengganti Yang Melakukan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Dalam Pembuatan Akta Autentik. Acta Comitas: Jurnal Hukum Kenotariatan, 6(2), 450–460. https://doi.org/10.24843/AC.2021.v06.i02.p18

Mahyuddin, D. L., & Saleh, M. (2025). Diskrepansi Regulasi: Tinjauan Atas Perbedaan Persyaratan Pengangkatan Notaris Dengan Notaris Pengganti Dalam Praktik Notarial Indonesia. Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia, 6(5), 2672–2679. https://doi.org/10.59141/japendi.v6i5.7749

Negara, T. A. S. (2023). Normative Legal Research in Indonesia: Its Origins and Approaches. Audito Comparative Law Journal, 4(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.22219/aclj.v4i1.24855

Oprandi, I. M. S. T., Styawati, N. K. A., & Agung, A. A. I. (2024). Akibat Hukum Akta Yang Dibuat Oleh Notaris Pengganti Berdasarkan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Jabatan Notaris. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora Dan Politik, 4(6), 2280–2289. https://doi.org/10.38035/jihhp.v4i6.2710

Otto, J. M. (2009). Rule of Law Promotion, Land Tenure and Poverty Alleviation: Questioning the Assumptions of Hernando de Soto. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 1(1), 173–194. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1876404509001730

Paunio, E. (2009). Beyond Predictability: Reflections on Legal Certainty and the Discourse Theory of Law in the EU Legal Order. German Law Journal, 10(11), 1469–1493. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200018332

Pistor, K., & Xu, C. (2003). Incomplete Law. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 35(4), 931–1013.

Putriane, Y. (2026). Tanggung Jawab Hukum Notaris Pengganti Terhadap Akta Yang Dibuatnya Yang Mengandung Cacat Formil Dan Cacat Materiil. Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.56370/jhlg.v7i4.3464

Riekayanti, H. Y., Ratna, E., & Prasetyo, M. H. (2020). Akibat Hukum Akta Yang Dibuat Notaris Pengganti Di Kota Semarang. Notarius, 13(2), 465–478. https://doi.org/10.14710/nts.v13i2.30506

Simangunsong, G. H., & Simamora, J. (2025). Pertanggungjawaban Hukum Notaris Pengganti Dalam Pembuatan Akta Melampaui Kewenangan Di Indonesia. Politica: Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara Dan Politik Islam, 11(2), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.32505/politica.v11i2.10541

Siregar, M. (2024). Teori Hukum Progresif Dalam Konsep Negara Hukum Indonesia. Muhammadiyah Law Review, 8(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.24127/mlr.v8i2.3567

Wahyudi, A., Erliyani, R., & Mispansyah. (2023). Tanggung Jawab Notaris Pengganti Atas Akta Notaris Yang Dibuat Oleh Notaris Tidak Berwenang Dalam Kewenangan Notaris Pengganti. Notary Law Journal, 2(3), 234–243. https://doi.org/10.32801/nolaj.v2i3.47




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.47006/ijlres.v10i2.31867

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2026 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON LANGUAGE, RESEARCH AND EDUCATION STUDIES

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 
Creative Commons License
International Journal on Language, Research and Education Studies (IJLRES) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License . You are free to share and adapt the material under the terms of this license, provided appropriate credit is given, it is not used for commercial purposes, and any derivatives are shared under the same license.