Executive vs. Judiciary: Conventional Auction Law in Indonesia and Malaysia
Abstract
This study offers a comparative analysis of conventional auction law in Indonesia and Malaysia, emphasizing how each country’s distinct legal tradition—Civil Law in Indonesia and Common Law in Malaysia—shapes its institutional framework and execution mechanisms. Despite their different foundations, both jurisdictions share fundamental principles: auctions must be conducted publicly, competitively, and under the supervision of officials vested with public authority. These shared principles ensure transparency, maximize market value, and provide strong legal certainty through the issuance of conclusive auction documents such as Indonesia’s Risalah Lelang and Malaysia’s Certificate of Sale. The core divergence lies in the institutional locus of authority. Indonesia adopts an Executive-Centric model, where the Directorate General of State Assets (DJKN) holds centralized regulatory power. Under this structure, the Pejabat Lelang Kelas I (PL I), as an administrative official, may execute Parate Eksekusi—a direct sale of collateral without a judicial order. In contrast, Malaysia applies a Judiciary-Centric system governed by the High Court. Forced sales of immovable property require a Judicial Order for Sale, reflecting stronger judicial oversight and greater procedural safeguards for debtors. Differences also emerge in the status and authority of private auctioneers. Indonesia’s Pejabat Lelang Kelas II (PL II) is limited to voluntary auctions but produces an authentic deed with perfect evidentiary value. Meanwhile, Malaysian licensed auctioneers may participate more broadly, including assisting in court-directed sales, though their documents do not automatically attain authentic deed status. By highlighting these convergences and divergences, this study contributes to understanding how institutional design influences efficiency, legal certainty, and public trust in auction mechanisms in both countries..
References
Ng, Kwai Hang, and Brynna Jacobson. “How Global Is the Common Law? A Comparative Study of Asian Common Law Systems–Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore.” Asian Journal of Comparative Law 12, no. 2 (2017): 209–32.
Rudy, Dewa Gde, and I Dewa Ayu Dwi Mayasari. “Keabsahan Alat Bukti Surat Dalam Hukum Acara Perdata Melalui Persidangan Secara Elektronik.” Jurnal Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan Undiksha 9, no. 1 (2021): 167–74.
Saepullah, Asep. “Peranan Alat Bukti Dalam Hukum Acara Peradilan.” Mahkamah: Jurnal Kajian Hukum Islam 3, no. 1 (2018): 141–57.
Sembiring, David Leon A, Yamin Lubis, Sutiarnoto Sutiarnoto, and Jelly Leviza. “Penyelesaian Perjanjian Kredit Macet Melalui Lelang Hak Tanggungan Akibat Wanprestasi Pihak Debitur Kepada PT. Bank Negara Indonesia Cabang Medan (Studi Putusan Nomor 464/PDT. G/2021/PN MDN).” Jurnal Intelek Dan Cendikiawan Nusantara 1, no. 5 (2024): 6245–60.
Siregar, Ria Juliana. “Pelaksanaan Lelang Terhadap Penerapan Prinsip Keadilan Di Indonesia.” Visi Sosial Humaniora 3, no. 2 (2022): 189–97.
Tay, Eng Siang, Ging Yee Ling, and Kwok Whee Chung. “Statutory Lien: Pre-and Post-2016 Amendments to the Malaysian National Land Code.” F1000Research 11 (2022): 123.
Tista, Adwin. “Perkembangan Sistem Lelang Di Indonesia.” Al Adl Jurnal Hukum 5, no. 10 (2013).
Zahra, Khansa Laily Az, Moh Fadwa Mufid Al Amjad, Syafa Nabya Maulidian, Septiani Silvia, and Fadilla Azfa Asyifa. “Relevansi Kepentingan Alat-Alat Bukti Dalam Proses Penyelesaian Hukum Perdata.” The Juris 8, no. 1 (2024): 95–104.
Copyright (c) 2025 Grace Kezia Caroline
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
