Ratio decidendi of judges' decisions on the use of foreign language agreements in Indonesia

ABSTRACT

This research analyzes how the legal considerations of judges in deciding cases of cancellation of agreements that use foreign languages without an Indonesian version and the legal consequences of violating the obligation to use Indonesian in the agreement. The research method used in this research is normative juridical with a statutory and case approach. Primary legal materials are obtained through legislation and judges' decisions, secondary materials are obtained through relevant literature studies and explained using grammatical legal interpretation. This research reveals that there are differences and legal interpretations by judges in deciding cases of canceling agreements that use foreign languages. In Case Decision Number 3395 K/Pdt/2019 the judge stated that the agreement that did not use the Indonesian language was considered "null and void", while in Case Decision Number 1124K/Pdt/2020 the judge stated that the agreement made using a foreign language without being accompanied by the Indonesian language was still considered "valid and binding". Analysis of the legal consequences of violating the obligation to use Indonesian If viewed from the perspective of the Notary Position Law, the existence of an agreement prepared only in a foreign language without an Indonesian version is a form of violation of imperative provisions in laws and regulations, especially Article 43 paragraph (1) of Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning Notary Position. The article explicitly stipulates that the deed is made in the Indonesian language. If it is related to a foreign party, the deed made is allowed to be in a foreign language but must be accompanied by an Indonesian version this provision is mandatory. So that agreements that are not made in Indonesian will be null and void. This research is expected to raise public awareness of the obligation to use Indonesian in agreements and the consistency of court decisions.