The withdrawal of a civil claim is a legal right granted to plaintiffs under the Indonesian civil procedure system. This provision allows plaintiffs to terminate an ongoing legal process for various reasons, such as an out-of-court settlement, a shift in legal strategy, or other considerations. However, the exercise of this right is not absolute and must be balanced with the legal interests of the defendant, particularly once the trial has commenced.
As explained by M. Yahya Harahap in his procedural law treatise, a claim is the procedural instrument used to bring a legal dispute before a court. It includes a description of the legal basis (posita) and the legal demands (petitum) against the defendant. Thus, the decision to withdraw a claim should not be viewed merely as a procedural right, but as a legal act with direct implications for the trial process and the defendant’s legal standing.
Two Stages of Withdrawal of Claims
Pursuant to Article 271 of the Reglement op de Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering (Rv), the withdrawal of a civil claim can occur at two distinct stages:
- Before the Defendant Submits a Response
The plaintiff has full authority to withdraw the claim without the defendant’s consent. At this stage, the withdrawal is considered a unilateral right, as the legal process has not yet affected the opposing party. - After the Defendant Submits a Response
Withdrawal may only proceed with the defendant’s approval. This reflects the fact that a formal legal contest has arisen before the court, and any unilateral withdrawal by the plaintiff must respect the principles of fair trial and due process owed to the defendant.
Balancing Procedural Rights and Legal Interests
In judicial practice, the right to withdraw a claim often creates tension between the plaintiff’s procedural autonomy and the defendant’s legal interests. For example, in Supreme Court Decision No. 1742 K/Pdt/1983, the panel of judges rejected the plaintiff’s request to withdraw the claim against one of the defendants, as that particular defendant did not provide consent. This ruling emphasized that withdrawal must not be used arbitrarily to avoid legal consequences or create uncertainty for the defendant.
Further, M. Yahya Harahap argues that withdrawing a claim after the defendant has submitted a defense can be prejudicial to the defendant, who has already invested time, resources, and effort in preparing a legal rebuttal. For this reason, the legal system requires the defendant’s consent as a safeguard to ensure procedural fairness and balance between parties.
Procedures and Legal Consequences
Article 272 Rv stipulates that withdrawal of a claim may be made by the plaintiff or their legal representative. If done before the first hearing, the plaintiff may submit a written request to the Chief Judge of the District Court to have the case removed from the register. However, if the withdrawal occurs after the trial has begun, it must be conducted in open court, subject to the defendant’s approval. Once approved, the court will issue an official decree to formalize the withdrawal.
In terms of costs, withdrawal does not exempt the plaintiff from liability for court fees. According to the Appendix to Government Regulation No. 5 of 2019, the administrative fee for withdrawal is set at IDR 10,000 per case, plus IDR 10,000 per summons for notification costs (relaas).
Conclusion
The withdrawal of a civil claim is not merely a procedural formality but must be exercised with regard to the legal interests of the opposing party. The legal system provides a balanced framework that upholds both the plaintiff’s right to withdraw and the defendant’s right to fair legal treatment. This ensures legal certainty, equity, and the integrity of the judicial process. Therefore, every instance of withdrawal must be approached with full consideration of legal responsibilities and the overarching principles of justice.