State Liabilities as Persero Shareholders Related with Corporate Veils Piercing Doctrine in Law Number 40 of 2007 Concerning the Limited Company

This paper seeks to examine the position of the State as a shareholder of Persero related to the doctrine of corporate veils. The position of the government as a regulator who has a strong interest in protecting State capital that is always faced with the interests of state creditor raises its own problems. Persero which is subject to Republic of Indonesia Law No.40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies (UUPT), Republic of Indonesia Law No.1 of 2004 concerning State Treasury (UUPN), Republic of Indonesia Law No.17 of 2003 concerning State Finance (UUK) creates collisions that are arising to be resolved. Article 3 of the Company Law as a basis for limited liability as well as being the basis for the unlimited liability of shareholders still raises problems in its implementation. Article 50 UUPN and Article 2 section (5) Law No.37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Postponement of Obligations to Pay Debt (Bankruptcy Law and PKPU), become an obstacle for Persero creditors to get their rights. If the Persero creditor does not get the right of state goals as a means to realize social justice and humanity that is fair and against not fulfilled. If the state treats the state as an alter ego then the doctrine of piercing corporate veil is applied so that the liability of the state as a shareholder is not limited to the value of shares owned.