Kepastian Hukum Bagi Perusahaan Pembiayaan Kendaraan Bermotor Terhadap Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/puu-Xvii/2019 Dalam Melakukan Eksekusi Jaminan Fidusia

Legal certainty is a guide to a clear, consistent and consistent law in its implementation that cannot be influenced by subjective circumstances. Fiduciary is a loan agreement from creditor to debtor which involves guarantee. The position of the guarantee is still in the control of the guarantee owner. In the case of fiduciary guarantees, the debtor when asking the financial institution usually uses collateral in the form of movable objects, the creditor will bind it to the fiduciary. With the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019, creditor companies or creditors cannot unilaterally execute objects of fiduciary security or collateral such as vehicles or houses. The finance company must first request an execution request from the District Court to be able to withdraw the object of a fiduciary guarantee as an alternative. Objects of collateral are tangible, intangible and immovable objects that cannot be guaranteed by mortgage. Fiduciary guarantees are widely used by financing companies. The debtor defaults, the leasing party executes the fiduciary object unilaterally, this is considered contrary to the 1945 Constitution. Article 15 paragraph (2) and Article 15 paragraph (3) of Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees are subject to a material review. The formulation of the problem, how is the execution of fiduciary guarantees after the decision of the Constitutional Court no. 18/PUU-XVII/2019. The presence of Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees is expected to create a strong guarantee institution and be able to provide legal certainty for creditors. This study uses empirical juridical methods or sociological legal research, namely a research approach to legal aspects relating to the subject matter to be discussed and linked to the reality in the field. This research was conducted at the District Court of Dumai City Class 1 A and Mandiri Utama Finance. While the population and sample are all parties related to the legal problem under study. Sources of data used are primary and secondary data, and for data collection techniques in this study is by observation, interviews, questionnaires and literature study. The results of this study are first to carry out a security confiscation, there must be two conditions, namely; there is an agreement on default or default and the debtor voluntarily submits the fiduciary guarantee to the financing company. Second, there is no clarity regarding the determination of breach of contract so that it slows down the execution process of the fiduciary guarantee object