Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze: 1) What are the factors that cause bad loans in banks? 2) Has the settlement of bad loans that the banks have been doing so far provided justice to the parties? 3) How is the Ideal Construction of an Alternative Bad Credit Settlement Between Creditors and Debtors That Are Fair?. The research method used is empirical juridical. Empirical juridical is an approach that is carried out based on field research or based on the dynamics of legal developments that occur in society. The results of the study show that: 1) In practice, the congestion of a credit is caused by the following 2 elements: (1) From the banking side, it means that in conducting the analysis, the analyst is not careful so that what should happen, is not predicted in advance or may be miscalculating. (2) From the customer's side, from the customer's side, credit congestion can be caused by 2 things, namely: first, there is an element of intentionality. In this case, the customer deliberately does not intend to pay his obligations. Second, there is an element of accident. This means that the debtor wants to pay but is unable to afford it. 2) In fact, the history of banking in Indonesia has inherited the most powerful and fast weapon in eradicating bad loans, namely through the execution parade or self-executing/directly (auctioning) collateral without court intervention. 3) Another more efficient and profitable way to resolve bad loans, namely through out-of-court settlement efforts. In the last year, the concept of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has also emerged to resolve civil disputes outside the litigation (judicial) process.

Keywords: Construction, Ideal, Settlement, Credit, Jammed, Banking, Creditors, Debtors, Equitable