Sumurung P Simaremare, Bismar Nasution, Sunarmic, Edi Yunara
Introduction: Dutch colonialisation of Indonesia provides many legacies, one of which is a legal product. The bankruptcy law specifically initially adopted Verordening Faillisements as the bankruptcy law. The development of the times was followed by the increasing complexity of the problems and demands for resolution-making legal changes necessary, of course, this happened in the two countries with the Netherlands, which used the Dutch Bankruptcy Act and Indonesia with Law Number 34 of 2004 having differences in the classification of Bankruptcy and its resolution.
Research Objectives: This study analyses the bankruptcy legal system's comparison between Indonesia and the Netherlands.
Research Methods: The type of research used is normative legal research with a comparative approach.
Conclusion: The comparison of the two bankruptcy laws was carried out to explore the differences between the two, which could be used as a basis for policy analysis that might later involve the two countries and reform the bankruptcy law in Indonesia in the future. The comparison of bankruptcy law is carried out using a statutory approach, comparative approach, a conceptual approach, and a historical approach. There are differences between the two laws of Bankruptcy adopted by Indonesia and the Netherlands, especially in determining a business's bankruptcy status and settling the Debtor's remaining debt to creditors. Where each country's legal system closely influences these differences, it is concluded that through its development, the Netherlands has implemented the Debt Forgiveness principle, contrary to Indonesia's principles, which still adheres to the Debt Collection principle.
The Delta Model for Fresh Water Policy Analysis in the Netherlands