Kepastian Hukum Putusan Badan Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen dalam Sengketa Telekomunikasi Melalui Arbitrase di Kota Medan (Studi Putusan No.90/Pdt.Sus-Bpsk/2021/Pn Mdn)

Abstract

Penelitian skripsi mengkaji mengenai kepastian hukum putusan Badan Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen antara pelaku usaha dan konsumen. Berdasarkan hal tersebut maka rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini, yaitu 1) Bagaimana pengaturan hukum penyelesaian sengketa konsumen melalui arbitrase di BPSK; 2) Bagaimana pertanggungjawaban pelaku usaha terhadap konsumen dalam sengketa telekomunikasi melalui arbitrase di BPSK Kota Medan (putusan Nomor 098/Arbitrase/2020/BPSK.Medan); dan 3) Bagaimana kepastian Hukum Putusan Badan Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen dalam sengketa Telekomunikasi melalui arbitrase di Kota Medan dalam putusan nomor 90/Pdt.Sus-BPSK/2021/PN Mdn. Adapun metode yang digunakan yaitu penelitian yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan dan kasus, teknik pengumpulan data menggunakan library research dan field research dan analisis data secara deskriptif analisis. Penelitian ini menghasilkan bahwa: Pengaturan hukum yang dipakai dalam penyelesaian sengketa konsumen di BPSK Kota Medan maupun Pengadilan Negeri Medan menggunakan Undang-Undang No. 8 Tahun 1999 tentang Perlindungan Konsumen, Pertanggungjawaban pelaku usaha dalam putusan nomor 098/Arbitrase/2020/BPSK.Medan tidak terlaksana dikarenakan pelaku usaha terkesan memainkan monopoli terhadap konsumen dan BPSK Kota Medan yang tidak mampu untuk memaksa pelaku usaha melaksanakan isi putusan, dan Putusan BPSK yang tidak memiliki kepastian hukum karena masih menggantungkan sifat final dan mengikat kepada putusan nomor 90/Pdt.Sus-BPSK/2021/PN Mdn yang memberikan kepastian hukum terhadap konsumen yang dirugikan oleh pelaku usaha perusahaan Telekomunikasi. Peneliti memberikan rekomendasi bahwa: Memperbaiki pasal-pasal di Undang-Undang No. 8 Tahun 1999 tentang Perlindungan Konsumen sehingga adanya harmonisasi dengan Undang-Undang No.30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa, menegaskan kembali sifat final dan mengikat agar pelaku usaha memiliki pertanggungjawaban atas putusan BPSK, dan Kepastian Hukum BPSK dapat tercermin jika putusan tersebut dapat terlaksana tanpa adanya campur tangan dari Pengadilan Negeri. The study examined the legal certainty of the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency/Badan Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen (BPSK) decision between business actors and consumers. Based on this, the formulation of the problem in this study, are 1) How the legal arrangement for resolving consumer disputes through arbitration at Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency was; 2) What the responsibility of business actors to consumers in telecommunication disputes through arbitration at Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency of Medan City (Decision Number 098/Arbitrase/2020/BPSK.Medan) was; 3) How the legal certainty of the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency Decision in the Telecommunication dispute through arbitration in Medan City in the decision number 90/Pdt.Sus-BPSK/2021/PN Mdn was. The method used was normative juridical research with a statutory and case approach, and data collection techniques used library research and field research, and data analysis using descriptive analysis. The results showed that the legal arrangements used in consumer dispute resolution at Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency of Medan City and Medan District Court used Law no. 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection, Accountability of business actors in decision number 098/Arbitrase/2020/BPSK.Medan was not implemented because business actors seemed to play a monopoly on consumers and the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency of Medan City was unable to force business actors to carry out the contents of the decision. Moreover, the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency Decision did not have legal certainty because it still depended on the final and binding nature of decision number 90/Pdt.Sus-BPSK/2021/PN Mdn which provided legal certainty to consumers who were harmed by business actors of Telecommunication companies. Researcher provided recommendations that: Improving the articles in Law no. 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection so that there was harmonization to Law No. 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution, Reaffirming the final and binding nature so that business actors had responsibility for Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency/BPSK decisions, and its legal certainty could be reflected if the decision could be carried out without being interferenced by the District Court.