PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI PEMODAL DALAM LAYANAN SECURITIES CROWDFUNDING BERDASARKAN POJK NOMOR 57/POJK.04/2020

Abstrak

Perkembangan teknologi finansial telah melahirkan inovasi pendanaan bagi Usaha Mikro, Kecil, dan Menengah (UMKM) melalui skema Securities Crowdfunding (SCF). Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (OJK) merespons hal ini dengan menerbitkan POJK Nomor 57/POJK.04/2020. Namun, dalam praktiknya, model investasi ini menimbulkan risiko yang signifikan bagi pemodal, seperti asimetri informasi dan potensi gagal bayar oleh perusahaan penerbit. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis bentuk perlindungan hukum bagi pemodal dalam layanan SCF serta efektivitas regulasi tersebut. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach) dan konseptual (conceptual approach). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa perlindungan hukum bagi pemodal terbagi menjadi dua ranah, yakni perlindungan preventif dan represif. Perlindungan preventif diwujudkan melalui kewajiban uji tuntas (due diligence) oleh penyelenggara, keterbukaan informasi (disclosure principle), batas maksimal investasi, dan masa pembatalan (cooling-off period). Sementara itu, perlindungan represif diakomodasi melalui pengenaan sanksi administratif oleh OJK, penyelesaian sengketa melalui LAPS SJK, serta upaya hukum perdata/pidana. Meskipun secara normatif komprehensif, efektivitas regulasi ini masih dihadapkan pada tantangan eksekusi jaminan saat gagal bayar dan belum likuidnya pasar sekunder, sehingga menuntut penguatan pengawasan digital dan peningkatan literasi pemodal.

The development of financial technology has spawned funding innovations for Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) through the Securities Crowdfunding (SCF) scheme. The Financial Services Authority (OJK) responded to this by issuing POJK Number 57/POJK.04/2020. However, in practice, this investment model poses significant risks for investors, such as information asymmetry and the potential for default by the issuing company. This study aims to analyze the form of legal protection for investors in SCF services and the effectiveness of this regulation. This research represents normative legal research employing statutory and conceptual approaches. The results of the study indicate that legal protection for investors is divided into two areas, namely preventive and repressive protection. Preventive protection is realized through due diligence obligations by organizers, information disclosure principles, maximum investment limits, and a cooling-off period. Meanwhile, repressive protection is accommodated through the imposition of administrative sanctions by OJK, dispute resolution through LAPS SJK, and civil/criminal legal efforts. Although normatively comprehensive, the effectiveness of this regulation still faces challenges regarding collateral execution during defaults and an illiquid secondary market, thus demanding stronger digital supervision and improved investor literacy.