JURIDICAL ANALYSIS OF PERSONAL GUARANTORS’ LEGAL POSITION IN INDONESIA’S PKPU MECHANISM TO ENSURE LEGAL CERTAINTY

Abstract

This article examines the legal position of personal guarantors in Indonesia’s Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU), distinguishing contractual liability from procedural debtor status. Using normative juridical research with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, it analyzes Law No. 37 of 2004, Articles 1820–1850 of the Civil Code, and Central Jakarta Commercial Court Decision No. 403/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2023/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst (18 January 2024). The court rejected a PKPU petition joining a corporate debtor and two personal guarantors without conclusively determining the alleged debt or enforceability of the guarantees. Article 254 excludes co-debtors and guarantors from PKPU protection, whereas Article 287 concerns guarantors of court-approved compositions. Waiving the benefit of prior exhaustion may affect enforcement but does not automatically establish PKPU respondent status. Legal certainty requires clear statutory classification, verifiable guaranteed obligations, predictable procedural treatment, and preservation of lawful remedies. Findings are confined to the examined provisions and decision, without generalizing across commercial courts.