Electronic Theses and Dissertation

ABSTRAK
Pasal 37 Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 tentang Jabatan Notaris mewajibkan notaris memberikan jasa hukum secara cuma-cuma kepada masyarakat tidak mampu sebagai perwujudan fungsi sosial jabatan notaris. Namun, ketentuan tersebut belum mengatur secara jelas bentuk, ruang lingkup, dan batasan pelaksanaannya sehingga menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum dalam praktik.
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis bentuk dan ruang lingkup kewajiban tersebut, mengkaji makna dan kedudukannya berdasarkan asas keadilan, kemanfaatan, dan kepastian hukum, serta menganalisis implikasi hukum bagi notaris yang tidak melaksanakannya.
Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan konseptual melalui analisis bahan hukum primer dan sekunder dengan penafsiran gramatikal dan sistematis.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa kewajiban pemberian jasa hukum secara cuma-cuma mencakup pelayanan kenotariatan berupa pembuatan akta dan penyuluhan hukum. Kewajiban ini merupakan norma imperatif sekaligus wujud tanggung jawab sosial notaris dalam menjamin akses keadilan bagi masyarakat tidak mampu serta berfungsi menyeimbangkan asas keadilan, kemanfaatan, dan kepastian hukum. Pelanggaran terhadap kewajiban tersebut menimbulkan sanksi administratif, sanksi etik, dan tanggung jawab perdata.
Oleh karena itu, diperlukan pengaturan yang lebih jelas dan terukur serta penguatan peran Majelis Pengawas Notaris agar pelaksanaannya berjalan secara proporsional, adil, dan efektif.
Kata Kunci: Notaris, Jasa Hukum Cuma-Cuma, Fungsi Sosial, Kepastian Hukum, Akses Keadilan.

ABSTRACT Article 37 of Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning Notary Position obliges notaries to provide free legal services to underprivileged communities as a manifestation of the social function of the notarial profession. However, the provision does not clearly regulate the form, scope, and limitations of its implementation, resulting in legal uncertainty in practice. This study aims to analyze the form and scope of such obligations, examine their meaning and position based on the principles of justice, utility, and legal certainty, and assess the legal implications for notaries who fail to fulfill these obligations. The research method used is normative juridical with statutory and conceptual approaches, through the analysis of primary and secondary legal materials using grammatical and systematic interpretation. The results show that the obligation to provide free legal services includes notarial services in the form of deed preparation and legal counseling. This obligation constitutes an imperative norm and reflects the social responsibility of notaries in ensuring access to justice for underprivileged communities, while also balancing the principles of justice, utility, and legal certainty. Violations of this obligation may result in administrative sanctions, ethical sanctions, and civil liability. Therefore, clearer and more measurable regulations are required, along with strengthening the role of the Notary Supervisory Council, to ensure that its implementation is proportional, fair, and effective. Keywords: Notary; Free Legal Services; Social Function; Legal Certainty; Access to Justice.