A Comparative Study of the Regulation of Concurrent Notarial Positions in Indonesia and Germany

Abstract

This study examines the regulation of concurrent notarial positions in Indonesia and Germany and assesses the relevance of their differences for Indonesian notarial law. It employs doctrinal legal research with a comparative legal approach, using common parameters including the legal status of notaries, forms of prohibition and exception, restrictions on professional roles, supervisory mechanisms, and legal consequences. The findings show that both jurisdictions protect notarial independence and impartiality through different regulatory constructions. Indonesian law primarily relies on categorical prohibitions under Article 17 of the Notary Office Law, supported by supervision and administrative sanctions. German law combines occupational incompatibilities with the Anwaltsnotar model, matter-specific participation prohibitions, judicial-administrative supervision, and differentiated legal consequences. The comparison shows that incompatibility operates at two levels: status-based incompatibility arising from holding another office or profession, and matter-specific incompatibility arising from involvement in a particular legal matter. Indonesian practice also indicates variation in supervisory reasoning, while German law more clearly separates professional restrictions from consequences affecting particular legal relationships. Accordingly, Indonesia’s principal regulatory challenge is not the absence of prohibitions, but the need for greater coherence in classifying incompatible roles, linking violations to appropriate legal consequences, and promoting more consistent supervisory reasoning. The German framework is therefore relevant as a comparative reference for regulatory differentiation rather than as a model for direct transplantation into the Indonesian notarial system under its existing structure.