Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 20 Download : 10

Main Article Content

Abstract

The notarial protocol is legally positioned as a state archive, yet the burden of its storage and maintenance is shifted to the receiving notary without financial support, adequate facilities, or clear limits of liability. This study analyses the legal position and regulation of notarial protocol transfer, examines whether such a burden reflects the principles of justice, proportionality, and legal protection for the receiving notary, and formulates digitalization as an alternative resolution. It employs normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, analysed prescriptively through the theories of legal certainty, legal responsibility, justice, proportionality, and legal protection. The findings show that the Law on the Position of Notary and its implementing regulations provide a basis for the transfer but fail to govern financing, storage standards, the limits of liability, and digitalization, producing a paradox between the state-archive status and the private bearing of the burden. This unilateral imposition is disproportionate and contrary to distributive justice because it externalises public costs to individuals without compensation. Digitalization of the protocol through an integrated electronic system may redistribute the burden, clarify the limits of liability through electronic traceability, and strengthen legal certainty and protection. The study recommends reforming the Law on the Position of Notary and enacting specific implementing regulations that link the state-archive status with the state's financing responsibility through a secure and confidential national electronic protocol system.

Keywords

Notarial protocol Protocol transfer Digitalization Legal certainty Legal protection

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Cut Raudhah Chalid, Muhammad Insa Ansari, Azhari

Creative Commons License

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

How to Cite
Chalid, C. R., Ansari, M. I., & Azhari. (2026). Legal Analysis of the Burden of Transferring Notarial Protocols and Alternative Solutions through Digitalization. Genesis Law and Social Sciences, 2(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.61975/glass.v2i2.137
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Amanda U. Kedudukan Akta Notaris sebagai Alat Bukti Tertulis dalam Pembuktian Peralihan Hak atas Tanah Berdasarkan Sistem Publikasi Negatif Bersertifikat. Tolis Ilmiah: Jurnal Penelitian 2026;8:28–37.
  2. Adjie H, Hafidh M. Hukum Protokol Notaris. Refika Aditama: Bandung 2023.
  3. Adjie H. Memahami: Majelis Pengawas Notaris (MPN) dan Majelis Kehormatan Notaris (MKN). Surabaya: Refika Aditama 2017.
  4. Deselta A, Sulistiyono A, Ginting R. Tanggung Jawab Notaris Terhadap Penolakan Untuk Menjadi Pemegang Protokol Notaris. Repertorium: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Kenotariatan 2023;12:168–76.
  5. Khairunnisa AK. Notary Protocols in Indonesia: Position, Urgency, and the Rule of Law. Yustisia Tirtayasa: Jurnal Tugas Akhir 2025;5.
  6. Kusuma AA. Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Protokol Notaris Dari Notaris Yang Meninggal Dunia Di Kabupaten Temanggung. Officium Notarium 2021;1:28–37.
  7. Abyan M. Implementasi Teknologi Blockchain dalam Penyimpanan Minuta Akta sebagai Protokol Notaris untuk Keamanan dan Mewujudkan Kepastian Hukum. PhD Thesis. Universitas Islam Sultan Agung Semarang, 2025.
  8. Rustam R. Tanggungjawab Ahli Waris Dan Kewenangan Majelis Pengawas Notaris Dalam Penyelesaian Protokol Minuta Hilang (Studi tentang Notaris yang Meninggal Dunia). Officium Notarium 2021;1:109–22.
  9. Marzuki PM. Penelitian Hukum (Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group) 2011.
  10. Susanti DO, Sh M, Efendi A, SH M. Penelitian hukum: Legal research. Sinar Grafika; 2022.
  11. Soekanto S. Penelitian hukum normatif: Suatu tinjauan singkat 2007.
  12. Hadjon PM. Perlindungan hukum bagi rakyat di Indonesia: sebuah studi tentang prinsip-prinsipnya, penanganannya oleh pengadilan dalam lingkungan peradilan umum dan pembentukan peradilan administrasi negara. Bina Ilmu; 1987.
  13. Harahap MY. Hukum Acara Perdata Jakarta: Sinar Grafika 2013.
  14. Mertokusumo S. Mengenal hukum: Suatu pengantar. (No Title) 1986.
  15. Borowski M. Gustav Radbruch’s critique of legal positivism. Dalam The Cambridge Companion to Legal Positivism, Diedit Oleh Torben Spaak Dan Patricia Mundus 2021:627–51.
  16. Notodisoerjo SR. Hukum notariat di Indonesia: suatu penjelasan. (No Title) 1982.
  17. Ridwan H. Hukum Administrasi Negara, Jakarta, RajaGrafindo Persada. Ridwan HR 2018.
  18. Adjie H. Hukum Notaris Indonesia Tafsir Tematik Terhadap UU No 30 2004.
  19. Noer Z, Fajriyah Y. Pertanggungjawaban Notaris Terhadap Protokol Notaris Sebagai Arsip Negara: Arsip Negara, Limitasi, Pertanggungjawaban, Protokol Notaris 2021.
  20. Sulihandari H, Rifiani N. Prinsip-prinsip dasar profesi Notaris. Jakarta: Dunia Cerdas 2013.
  21. Ma’ruf MA, Handoko W. Tanggung Jawab Notaris Terhadap Peralihan Protokol Notaris Yang Diserahkan Kepadanya. Notarius n.d.;16:1528–42.
  22. Crisp R. Aristotle: nicomachean ethics. Cambridge University Press; 2014.
  23. Sjaifurrachman, Adjie H. Aspek Pertanggungjawaban Notaris dalam Pembuatan Akta. Mandar Maju; 2011.
  24. Makarim E. Notaris dan transaksi elektronik: kajian hukum tentang cybernotary atau electronic notary 2020.
  25. Anshori AG. Lembaga kenotariatan Indonesia: perspektif hukum dan etika 2009.