Juridical review of notary accountability for making the deed that arouse criminal cases(Case Study of Supreme Court Decision No. 1014 K/PID/2013)
This study has aims to find out how the notary's accountability in carrying out the task of making a deed that arouse a criminal case, how the legal consequences for it, and what are the things that make a notary public involved in falsifying a notary deed relating to Supreme Court Decision Number 1014 K / PID / 2013. This research used doctrinal and then analyzed by prescriptive approach by using secondary data sources from primary and secondary legal materials to analyze various laws and regulations in Notary law and regulations concerning ethical codes of notary. The results of this study indicate that the Notary Ninoek Poernomo (defendant) had violated the UUJN and the Notary ethical codes and was consciously violated Article 264 of the Criminal Code so that she was responsible for what she had done. Regarding the deed, it is not automatically canceled but becomes a fraudulent act; it can only be canceled by a judge's decision through a civil complaint. Some of the factors that cause a Notary to be involved in a criminal act are notary ethics and takes a side with one party, the valid data submitted by the parties related to the Notary, Notary supervision, and false rules.