The Dialectic between Shareholder Primacy and Stakeholder Theory in the Indonesian Corporate Law System
Keywords:
Shareholder Primacy; Stakeholder Theory; Indonesian Corporate Law; Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG).Abstract
This study analyzes the dialectical tension between the shareholder primacy paradigm and stakeholder theory in the framework of Indonesian corporate law. Law No. 40 of 2007 (UUPT) constructs an ambiguous hybrid model, in which governance architectures (such as GMS) support shareholder primacy, while positive legal obligations (Article 74 on CSR) encourage stakeholder models. The epicenter of this tension is the legal vacuum in the definition of "corporate interests". Using normative juridical research methods with legislative, conceptual, and case approaches, this study examines how the dialectic is resolved in practice. The main finding shows a paradigm shift: this dialectic is no longer only debated in the courtroom through the hard law of the UUPT. On the contrary, the Financial Services Authority's (OJK) soft law regulation on Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) has created a "legislative shortcut". By requiring disclosure in the capital market, the OJK de facto forces corporations to adopt a stakeholder model, making the OJK a stronger agent of change than the judiciary. This study recommends clarification of the UUPT through the adoption of the principle of enlightened shareholder value (ESV) and strengthening ESG supervision by the OJK from mere disclosure to substantive supervision.
References
Rönnegard, D., & Smith, N. C. (2019). Shareholder primacy vs. stakeholder theory. The Cambridge handbook of stakeholder theory, 117-131.
Choudhury, B., & Petrin, M. (2023). Stuck in Neutral? Reforming Corporate Purpose and Fiduciary Duties. SSRN.
Stoelhorst, J. W., & Vishwanathan, P. (2024). Beyond primacy: A stakeholder theory of corporate governance. Academy of Management Review, 49(1), 107-134.
Sudaryat, S. (2020). Tanggungjawab Pemegang Saham Mayoritas yang Merangkap sebagai Direksi terhadap Kerugian Pihak Ketiga Akibat Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Perseroan. Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum, 4(2), 313.
Harrison, J. S., Phillips, R. A., & Freeman, R. E. (2020). On the 2019 business roundtable “statement on the purpose of a corporation”. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1223-1237
Harrison, J. S., Phillips, R. A., & Freeman, R. E. (2020). On the 2019 business roundtable “statement on the purpose of a corporation”. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1223-1237
Mahoney, J. T. (2012). Towards a stakeholder theory of strategic management. Towards a New Theory of the Firm. Barcelona: IESE Research Unit, forthcoming, 110.
Rönnegard, D., & Smith, N. C. (2019). Shareholder primacy vs. stakeholder theory. The Cambridge handbook of stakeholder theory, 117-131.
Moore, G. (1999). Tinged shareholder theory: or what’s so special about stakeholders?. Business Ethics: A European Review, 8(2), 117-127.
Stoelhorst, J. W., & Vishwanathan, P. (2024). Beyond primacy: A stakeholder theory of corporate governance. Academy of Management Review, 49(1), 107-134.
LawTeacher. (2018, 2 Februari). Criticisms of shareholder and stakeholder debate. LawTeacher.net. https://www.lawteacher.net
Stoelhorst, J. W., & Vishwanathan, P. (2024). Beyond primacy: A stakeholder theory of corporate governance. Academy of Management Review, 49(1), 107-134.
Stoelhorst, J. W., & Vishwanathan, P. (2024). Beyond primacy: A stakeholder theory of corporate governance. Academy of Management Review, 49(1), 107-134.
Alhumaymidi, R. (2021). Shareholder theory vs stakeholder theory. Research Gare, 1-18.
Ajebi, A. (2023, 31 Maret). Mengenal beberapa doktrin hukum dalam perseroan terbatas. Persekutuan Perdata Doni Budiono & Rekan.
Supriyatna, T. (2024). Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Atas Keputusan Bisnis Direksi Badan Usaha Milik Negara Yang Menerapan Doktrin Business Judgement Rule. Jurnal Nalar Keadilan, 4(1), 15-33.
Sudaryat, S. (2020). Tanggungjawab Pemegang Saham Mayoritas yang Merangkap sebagai Direksi terhadap Kerugian Pihak Ketiga Akibat Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Perseroan. Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum, 4(2), 313.
Surahman, M., Triana, D., Hosnah, A. U., & Febrianty, Y. (2023). Analisis Peran Notaris Dan Keabsahan Akta Rups Yang Dilakukan Melalui Media Telekonferensi. Jurnal Hukum, 20(1), 266-275.
Sudaryat, S. (2020). Tanggungjawab Pemegang Saham Mayoritas yang Merangkap sebagai Direksi terhadap Kerugian Pihak Ketiga Akibat Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Perseroan. Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum, 4(2), 313.
Oppusunggu, Y. U. (2011). Mandatory Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibilities in the New Indonesian Limited Liability Law. Indon. L. Rev., 1, 71.
Blegur, M. M. (2023). Tanggung jawab sosial dan lingkungan perseroan terbatas dalam pemanfaatan air terhadap masyarakat di daerah. Journal Publicuho, 6(1), 42-55.
Herdiansyah, H., Najwan, J., & Hasan, U. (2022). Article Tanggung Jawab Sosial Perusahaan (Corporate Social Responsibility) Dalam Perspektif Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia: Tanggung Jawab Sosial Perusahaan (Corporate Social Responsibility) Dalam Perspektif Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia. Hangoluan Law Review, 1(1), 36-68.
Mariani, D. (2014). Analisis Yuridis Tanggung Jawab Hukum Perdata Terhadap Perseroan Terbatas Yang Tidak Melaksanakan Tanggung Jawab Sosial Dan Lingkungan Berdasarkan Pasal 74 Uu No. 40 Tahun 2007 Tentang Perseroan Terbatas. Jurnal Hukum Prodi Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Untan (Jurnal Mahasiswa S1 Fakultas Hukum) Universitas Tanjungpura, 2(3).
Herdiansyah, H., Najwan, J., & Hasan, U. (2022). Article Tanggung Jawab Sosial Perusahaan (Corporate Social Responsibility) Dalam Perspektif Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia: Tanggung Jawab Sosial Perusahaan (Corporate Social Responsibility) Dalam Perspektif Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia. Hangoluan Law Review, 1(1), 36-68.
Alhumaymidi, R. (2021). Shareholder theory vs stakeholder theory. Research Gare, 1-18.
Ajebi, A. (2023, 31 Maret). Mengenal beberapa doktrin hukum dalam perseroan terbatas. Persekutuan Perdata Doni Budiono & Rekan.
Nadiroh, A. N. (2020). Batas tanggung jawab perusahaan dalam corporate social responbility (CSR). Era Hukum-Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Hukum, 18(2).
Hasbulloh, A. R. (2022). Konflik Kepentingan Antara Direksi Dengan Perusahaan Terhadap Merek Terdaftar Dalam Perspektif Good Corporate Governance. Lex Renaissance, 7(1), 1-15.
Ratnadi, N. M. D. (2014). Konflik Pemegang Saham dan Konservatisme Akuntansi (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Brawijaya). Lihat juga dalam Saepudin, E., Surya, N. C., & Raswa, E. (2009, 30 November). Sudah dua kali Bambang cabut gugatan ke McD. KONTAN.co.id. https://nasional.kontan.co.id/news/sudah-dua-kali-bambang-cabut-gugatan-ke-mcd--1
Otoritas Jasa Keuangan, Roadmap Keuangan Berkelanjutan Tahap II (2021 – 2025) (Jakarta: Otoritas Jasa Keuangan, t.t.)
IDX Sustainability. (t.t.). Regulation and guidance. Diakses 1 November 2025, dari https://sustainability.idx.co.id/regulation-and-guidance
Ulfa, S. N., & Rahman, A. (2024). Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) pada Kinerja Perusahaan denganBoard Gender Diversity sebagai Pemoderasi. Jurnal Ilmiah Edunomika, 8(2).
Aspan, H. (2017). Aspek Hukum Dalam Bisnis: Tinjauan Atas Masalah Perlindungan Hukum Pemegang Saham Minoritas dan Masalah Penggabungan Perusahaan (Merger). Halaman Moeka, Jakarta.
Aspan, H., & Wahyuni, E. S. (2025). Hukum Pasar Modal (Obligasi/Saham, Corporate Law & Surat Berharga). Serasi Media Teknologi.
Aspan, H. (2017). Good corporate governance principles in the management of limited liability company. International Journal of Law Reconstruction, 1(1), 87.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Arman Candra, Fitri Rafianti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
International Conference On Islamic Community Studies, Education and Science, its website, and the articles published therein are licensed under a 
