Dualism of Foundation Governance and Its Legal Implications: A Legal Analysis of Court Decision No. 6/Pdt.G/2025/PN Agm on Civil Wrongdoing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37680/almanhaj.v7i2.8510Keywords:
Organizational Dispute; Civil Wrongdoing; Substantive Legality; Notarial Deed; Judicial Decision; Dual Leadership ConflictAbstract
Disputes over foundation governance in Indonesia are frequently resolved through formal administrative approaches, often overlooking the substantive legitimacy of founders and internal procedures. This study analyzes judicial reasoning in Court Decision No. 6/Pdt.G/2025/PN Agm, specifically regarding the validity of management and its alignment with the principle of legality. Utilizing normative legal methods, including statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, this research examines court decisions, legislation, and academic literature. The findings suggest that the court prioritizes administrative aspects over statutory requirements, including founders' meetings and articles of association. This leads to non-normative reasoning, including the pragmatic assumption that "whoever produces the document first prevails." Additionally, the absence of notary involvement in examining amended deeds resulted in formal defects, as notarial deeds cannot be legally assessed without the presence of the drafter. The study concludes that foundation dispute resolution must strike a balance between formal and substantive legality, while ensuring a comprehensive examination of notarial deeds. This research contributes to the discourse by highlighting the need for harmonized judicial practice and evaluating the procedural role of notaries in cases involving dual governance.
References
Andrew Bellamy. (2020a). Administrative Registration and Legal Authority. International Journal of Law and Information Technology 28, no. 3, 215–233.
Andrew Bellamy. (2020b). Electronic Registration Systems and Legal Authority. International Journal of Law and Information Technology 28, no. 3, 215–233.
Article 1 Paragraph (1) of Law Number 16 of 2001 Concerning Foundations. (2001).
Brian Z. Tamanaha. (2019a). The Rule of Law and Legal Certainty. New York University Law Review 92, no. 1, 1–45.
Brian Z. Tamanaha. (2019b). The Rule of Law and Legal Certainty. The Rule of Law and Legal Certainty, no. 1, 1–45.
Brody, E. (2016a). Administrative law (9th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Brody, E. (2016b). The law of nonprofit organizations. Aspen Publishers.
Deborah DeMott. (2018). Fraud, Bad Faith, and Legal Validity. Duke Law Journal 59, no. 5, 879–924.
DeMott, D. A. (2018). Fiduciary obligation, agency, and fraud. Law and Contemporary Problems, 81, 3, 1–25.
Evelyn Brody. (2019). The Board of Nonprofit Organizations: Puzzling Through the Gaps Between Law and Practice. Journal of Corporation Law 34, 521–560.
Geoffrey Samuel. (2020). Substantive Justice and Legal Method. International Journal of Law in Context 16, no. 3, 567–599.
H. L. A. Hart. (2012). The Concept of Law, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hall, M. (2014). Accountability, Transparency, and Legitimacy in Nonprofit Organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43, 2, 217–234.
Hans Kelsen. (2002). General Theory of Law and State.
Hansmann, H. (1980). The role of nonprofit enterprise. Yale Law Journal, 5, 835–901.
Harding, M. (2014). Trust, law, and legitimacy. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 34, 2, 291–314.
J. H. A. van Apeldoorn. (1958). Introduction to the Study of Law.
Jan de Vries. (2017a). Authority and Internal Legitimacy in Foundation Governance. Netherlands Law Review 65, no. 1, 133–150.
Jan de Vries. (2017b). Founders’ Authority and Supervisory Board Decisions in Foundation Law. Netherlands Law Review 65, no. 1, 133–150.
Jan de Vries. (2017c). Founders’ Authority in Foundation Law. Netherlands Law Review 65, no. 1, 133–150.
Kelsen, H. (1967). Pure theory of law (M. Knight, Trans.). University of California Press.
Krygier, M. (2016). Rule of law and legal integrity. Law & Philosophy, 35, 5, 835–901.
Law Number 16 of 2001 Concerning Foundations (2001).
Law Number 28 of 2004 on the Amendment of Law Number 16 of 2001 Concerning Foundations.
Mark Elliott. (2018). The Constitutional Foundations of Judicial Review. Cambridge Law Journal 77, no. 1, 28–56.
Mark Van Hoecke. (2011). Legal Doctrine: Which Method(s) for What Kind of Discipline? Rechtsfilosofie & Rechtstheorie 1, no. 1, 1–18.
Mark Van Hoecke. (2020). Legal Formalism and Substantive Justice. International Journal of Law in Context 16, no. 2, 129–146.
Martin Krygier. (2018). Due Process and the Rule of Law. Law and Philosophy 37, no. 4, 353–378.
Matthew Harding. (2020a). Judicial Reasoning in Organizational Disputes. International Journal of Evidence and Proof 24, no. 3, 251–269.
Matthew Harding. (2020b). Notarial Responsibility and Evidentiary Integrity. International Journal of Evidence and Proof 24, no. 3, 251–269.
Neil Andrews. (2018a). Principles of Civil Procedure.
Neil Andrews. (2018b). Principles of Civil Procedure.
Paul Craig. (2018). Formal and Substantive Rule of Law. Public Law, 467–487.
Paul Craig and Gráinne de Búrca. (2018). EU Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 38, no. 4, 681–708.
Peter Mahmud Marzuki. (2019). Legal Research: A Normative Perspective. Journal of Legal Studies 8, no. 2, 145–162.
Posner, R. A. (2008). How judges think. Harvard University Press.
Rebecca Lee. (2022). Authentic Deeds and Judicial Scrutiny. Civil Justice Quarterly 41, no. 3, 265–284.
Richard Posner. (2018). Judicial Behavior and Legal Pragmatism. University of Chicago Law Review 85, no. 3, 567–599.
Samuel, G. (2014). An introduction to comparative law theory and method.
Terry Hutchinson & Nigel Duncan. (2012). Defining and Describing What We Do: Doctrinal Legal Research. Deakin Law Review 17, no. 1, 83–119.
Thomas Reed. (2021a). Judicial Reasoning in Organizational Disputes. Law and Society Review 55, no. 1, 87–112.
Thomas Reed. (2021b). Judicial Reasoning in Organizational Disputes. Law and Society Review 55, no. 1, 251–269.
Van Apeldoorn, J. H. A. (2017). Introduction to jurisprudence. Wolters Kluwer.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Dela Puspita, Riri Tri Mayasari, Hendi Sastra Putra, Mikho Ardinata
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright:
- Author retains the copyright and grants the journal the right of first publication of the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book) with the acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Author is permitted and encouraged to post his/her work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
License:
-
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
-
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
