Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Agus Sahbani, Andin Aditya Rahman
Constitutional Court (MK) allows marital accounts to be accessible during judicial proceedings, such as divorce. This crucial point was rendered by MK, Thursday (28/2), in Decision No. 64/PUU-X/2012 (Decision), which partially allowed judicial review of Article 40 (1) of Law No. 10 of 1998 on Amendment to Law No. 7 of 1992 on Banking (Banking Law).
The judicial review of the Banking Law was filed by Magda Safrina, an Indonesian citizen, on 12 June 2012 stating that it violates Articles 28G (1) and 28H (4) of the 1945 Constitution.
Magda stated that the judicial review related to her divorce application, as she was denied access by a particular bank to her own marital bank account because it was established under her husband’s name.
The reviewed article itself stated that “banks must conceal information on Bank Customers and their deposits, except for matters under Articles 41, 41A, 42, 43, 44, and 44A.”
Also, Article 28G (1) stipulates the right to live in physical and spiritual prosperity, whereas Article 28H (4) states that: “Every person shall have the right to own personal property and such property may not be unjustly held in possession of any party.”
In the Decision, MK recognized that while protecting privacy of bank clients is vital, there are still some important exceptions, such as tax related matters or criminal proceedings, which allow release of information.
Therefore, MK found that denying access to a marital bank account is unconstitutional and allowed marital accounts to be accessible during judicial proceedings, such as a divorce.
As a result, Article 40 (1) of Banking Law was interpreted to include marital bank accounts as one of the exceptions. With this Decision, Magda now has legal basis to access the said account.
She hopes that this puts an end to the typical stance of banks in restricting wives’ access to their marital property account that is established in the husband’s name.
This Decision will assist women to have fair divorce proceedings when it comes to the division of marital property, Magda concluded.
(jt/hot)
Agus Sahbani, Andin Aditya Rahman
Constitutional Court (MK) allows marital accounts to be accessible during judicial proceedings, such as divorce. This crucial point was rendered by MK, Thursday (28/2), in Decision No. 64/PUU-X/2012 (Decision), which partially allowed judicial review of Article 40 (1) of Law No. 10 of 1998 on Amendment to Law No. 7 of 1992 on Banking (Banking Law).
The judicial review of the Banking Law was filed by Magda Safrina, an Indonesian citizen, on 12 June 2012 stating that it violates Articles 28G (1) and 28H (4) of the 1945 Constitution.
Magda stated that the judicial review related to her divorce application, as she was denied access by a particular bank to her own marital bank account because it was established under her husband’s name.
The reviewed article itself stated that “banks must conceal information on Bank Customers and their deposits, except for matters under Articles 41, 41A, 42, 43, 44, and 44A.”
Also, Article 28G (1) stipulates the right to live in physical and spiritual prosperity, whereas Article 28H (4) states that: “Every person shall have the right to own personal property and such property may not be unjustly held in possession of any party.”
In the Decision, MK recognized that while protecting privacy of bank clients is vital, there are still some important exceptions, such as tax related matters or criminal proceedings, which allow release of information.
Therefore, MK found that denying access to a marital bank account is unconstitutional and allowed marital accounts to be accessible during judicial proceedings, such as a divorce.
As a result, Article 40 (1) of Banking Law was interpreted to include marital bank accounts as one of the exceptions. With this Decision, Magda now has legal basis to access the said account.
She hopes that this puts an end to the typical stance of banks in restricting wives’ access to their marital property account that is established in the husband’s name.
This Decision will assist women to have fair divorce proceedings when it comes to the division of marital property, Magda concluded.
(jt/hot)