Digital Asset Insolvency in the Blockchain Era: A Framework for Bankruptcy Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59261/jlsp.v4i4.173Keywords:
Digital Assets, Blockchain Technology, Bankruptcy LawAbstract
Background: Blockchain-based assets increasingly operate as investment and commercial property, yet their decentralized architecture, pseudonymous control, volatility, and cross-border transferability challenge conventional bankruptcy mechanisms.
Objective: This study examines how digital assets may be treated under insolvency law, identifies legal and operational obstacles to their administration, and develops a Digital Asset Insolvency Framework for Indonesia.
Methods: Using normative legal research, the study combines statutory, conceptual, comparative, and case approaches. Indonesia is assessed against developments in the United Kingdom, Singapore, and the United States across property status, disclosure, control, valuation, liquidation, distribution, and institutional capacity.
Results: Digital assets may be recognized as property and included in a bankruptcy estate where applicable legal doctrine supports their economic value, transferability, identifiability, and effective control. The analysis nevertheless identifies persistent gaps in wallet disclosure, private-key access, ownership verification, valuation timing, liquidation security, and cross-border recovery. The study's novelty lies in an integrated five-pillar framework linking disclosure-based transparency, access-based control, adaptive valuation, secure liquidation and distribution, and institutional capacity. This framework translates comparative legal developments into operational guidance for Indonesian insolvency governance.
Conclusion: A technology-responsive insolvency regime should combine legal recognition with enforceable access, valuation, liquidation, and institutional mechanisms so that digital assets can be administered transparently while protecting creditor equality and asset value.
References
Arner, D. W., Barberis, J., & Buckley, R. P. (2017). FinTech, RegTech and the Reconceptualization of Financial Regulation. Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, 37(3), 371–413. https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/njilb/vol37/iss3/2/
Aswadi, K., & Mudiparwanto, W. A. (2024). Perlindungan hukum aset kripto sebagai objek jaminan berdasarkan perspektif hukum jaminan. Diversi: Jurnal Hukum, 10(2), 424–456. https://doi.org/10.32503/diversi.v10i2.6841
Baskind, E., & Osborne, G. (2025). Commercial law. Oxford University Press.
Bora, A. (2026). Responsive sociology of law. In Research Handbook on Law and Systems Theory (pp. 67–77). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Briggs, A. (2023). Private International Law in English Courts 2e. Oxford University Press.
Casey, D. (2026). Regulatory Technologies and Regulatory Intermediaries: Converging Regulatory Responses to RegTech. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 1–17.
Cassar, D. P. (2023). The Notion of Mistake in Blockchain-Based Smart Contracts: An Analysis of B2C2 Ltd v Quoine Pte Ltd from a Comparative Perspective. European Journal of Comparative Law and Governance, 10(2), 253–282.
Castellucci, I. (2020). Cryptoassets and Property Law: A Comparative Perspective. European Business Law Review, 31(4), 603–622. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Cryptoassets+and+property+law%3A+A+comparative+perspective+Castellucci+2020+European+Business+Law+Review
B2C2 Ltd v Quoine Pte Ltd, (2019). https://www.elitigation.sg/gd/s/2019_SGHCI_3
De Cruz, P. (2024). Comparative law in a changing world. Taylor & Francis.
De Filippi, P., Mannan, M., & Reijers, W. (2024). Blockchain technology and the rule of code: Regulation via governance. Geo. Wash. L. Rev., 92, 1229.
De Filippi, P., & Wright, A. (2018). Blockchain and the Law: The Rule of Code. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674985933
In re FTX Trading Ltd., (2022). https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22In+re+FTX+Trading+Ltd.%22+22-11068
Deviana, N. T., & Gunadi, A. (2025). Legal protection for creditors in suspension of debt payment obligations (PKPU): A critique of the implementation of Law Number 37 of 2004 on bankruptcy. Jurisprudensi: Jurnal Ilmu Syariah, Perundang-Undangan Dan Ekonomi Islam, 17(1), 339–353.
Dignam, A., & Lowry, J. P. (2022). Company law. Oxford University Press.
Fairfield, J. A. T. (2015). BitProperty. Southern California Law Review, 88(4), 805–874. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=BitProperty+Fairfield+2015+Southern+California+Law+Review
Feibelman, A. (2022). Bankruptcy and the State. Emory Bankr. Dev. J., 38, 1.
Fletcher, I. F. (2005). Insolvency in Private International Law: National and International Approaches (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199262502.001.0001
Fletcher, I. F. (2017). The Law of Insolvency (5th ed.). Sweet & Maxwell. https://store.thomsonreuters.com.au/the-law-of-insolvency-5th-edition/productdetail/125585
Fox, D., & Green, S. (2019). Cryptocurrencies in Public and Private Law. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198826385.001.0001
Giancaspro, M. (2017). Is a ‘smart contract’ really a smart idea? Insights from a legal perspective. Computer Law & Security Review, 33(6), 825–835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2017.05.007
Goode, R. (2016). Goode on Commercial Law (5th ed.). Butterworths. https://books.google.com/books?id=F-InjgEACAAJ
Goode, R. (2018). Goode on Principles of Corporate Insolvency Law (5th ed.). Sweet & Maxwell. https://books.google.com/books?id=bgcxrgEACAAJ
Green, S. (2019). Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts: Consultation Paper. Law Commission of England and Wales. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Cryptoassets+and+Smart+Contracts%3A+Consultation+Paper+Sarah+Green+Law+Commission+of+England+and+Wales+2019
Hamza, R., & Pradana, H. (2022). A survey of intellectual property rights protection in big data applications. Algorithms, 15(11), 418.
Haynes, A. (2022). Cryptocurrencies in Public and Private Law. Banking & Finance Law Review, 39(1), 145–148.
AA v Persons Unknown & Ors, Re Bitcoin, (2019). https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2019/3556.html
Husa, J. (2023). Introduction to comparative law.
Hutchinson, T. C. M. (2018). Researching and Writing in Law (4th ed.). Lawbook Co. https://store.thomsonreuters.com.au/researching-and-writing-in-law-fourth-edition-book/productdetail/124535
Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations, (2004). https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Law+Number+37+of+2004+concerning+Bankruptcy+and+Suspension+of+Debt+Payment+Obligations+Indonesia
Komoditi, B. P. P. B. (2024). Bappebti Catat Transaksi Aset Kripto di Indonesia Tembus Rp475,13 Triliun pada Januari–Oktober 2024. Badan Pengawas Perdagangan Berjangka Komoditi, Kementerian Perdagangan Republik Indonesia. https://bappebti.go.id/siaran_pers/index/45
Law, U. N. C. on I. T. (2014). UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency with Guide to Enactment and Interpretation. United Nations. https://uncitral.un.org/en/texts/insolvency/modellaw/cross-border_insolvency
Low, K. F. K., & Hara, M. (2024). Cryptoassets and property. In Research Handbook on European Property Law (pp. 146–156). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Low, K. F. K., & Teo, E. G. S. (2020). Cryptocurrency and Bankruptcy. Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 32, 1–28. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Cryptocurrency+and+bankruptcy%22+%22Low%22+%22Teo%22
Marzuki, P. M. (2021). Penelitian Hukum (Edisi revi). Kencana. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Peter+Mahmud+Marzuki+Penelitian+Hukum+2021+Kencana
Maydanyk, R. (2024). Smart contract on a crypto assets in the civil law and common law jurisdictions: Implementation of best practices. Open J. Legal Stud., 7, 15.
MAYDANYK, R. (2025). A SMART CONTRACT ON CRYPTOASSETS. Evolution of Private Law. New Technologies, 54.
Michaels, R. (2006). The Functional Method of Comparative Law. In The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law (pp. 339–382). Oxford University Press. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/38689/chapter-abstract/335948011
Mik, E. (2020). Cryptoassets as Property: How Novel Is the Novelty? Law, Innovation and Technology, 12(2), 229–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2020.1829525
Mustafa. (2024). Metodologi Penelitian Hukum (1st ed.). CV Eureka Media Aksara. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Metodologi+Penelitian+Hukum
Nonet, P., & Selznick, P. (1978). Law and Society in Transition: Toward Responsive Law. Harper & Row. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Law+and+Society+in+Transition+Toward+Responsive+Law+Nonet+Selznick+1978
Paech, P. (2017). The Governance of Blockchain Financial Networks. The Modern Law Review, 80(6), 1073–1110. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12303
Parry, R., & Olivares-Caminal, R. (2022). The Treatment of Cryptocurrencies in Insolvency Proceedings. International Insolvency Review, 31(2), 211–230. https://doi.org/10.1002/iir.1457
Poon, K., Sim, K. K., & Zhu, W. (2022). Insolvency law. Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review of Singapore Cases, 508–544.
Pronina, N. A., & Buyanov, A. V. (2023). Smart Contract as a New Legal Phenomenon. In Complex Social Systems in Dynamic Environments: Advanced Theories, Innovative Methods, and Interdisciplinary Research Results (pp. 539–549). Springer.
Rahardja, M. G. S., Ikhwansyah, I., & Mantili, R. (2026). Legal Protection of Bankrupt Debtors and Creditors Against Curators’ Actions That Diminish the Bankruptcy Estate. Begawan Abioso, 17(2), 293–303.
Ramadhania, L. M. (2023). A Dualistic Concept of Personal Guarantee Responsibility and Its Relevancy with Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation A Dualism Of Personal Guarantee Responsibility In Indonesia Bankruptcy Law. Legal Brief, 12(1), 22–35.
Reed, C. (2012). Making Laws for Cyberspace. Oxford University Press. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Making+Laws+for+Cyberspace+Chris+Reed+2012
Roselle, L., Shelton, J. T., & Spray, S. (2025). Research and writing in international relations. Routledge.
Samuel, G. (2014). An Introduction to Comparative Law Theory and Method. Hart Publishing. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=An+Introduction+to+Comparative+Law+Theory+and+Method+Geoffrey+Samuel+2014
Schwartz, W. M., Roberts, C. S., & Lee, K. S. (2024). Cryptocurrency, Blockchain and Bankruptcy. American Bankruptcy Institute Journal, 43(11), 32–57.
Setyomurni, T. S. (2026). Wanprestasi Pengalihan Hak Sewa Tanah Kebun: Analisis Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata Dan Kompilasi Hukum Ekonomi Syariah (Studi Di Desa Gagaksipat): Studi di Desa Gagaksipat. Jurnal Ilmiah Ekonomi Islam, 12(2), 46–54.
Siems, M. (2026). Legal transplants: An interdisciplinary approach. Oxford University Press.
Companies Act 1967, (1967). https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/CoA1967
CLM v CLN and Others, (2022). https://www.elitigation.sg/gd/s/2022_SGHC_46
Sjahdeni, S. R. (2011). Hukum Kepailitan: Memahami Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan. PT Pustaka Utama Grafiti.
Spinello, R. A. (2026). Cyberethics: Morality and law in cyberspace. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
United States Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. § 541 (Property of the estate), (1978). https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title11-section541
Steffek, F. (2026). The Ethical Foundations of Corporate Insolvency Law: Sketches of a Justice Theory for Corporate Financial Distress.
Subekti. (1999). Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata. Pradnya Paramita.
Taskforce, U. K. J. (2019). Legal Statement on Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts. LawTech Delivery Panel. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Legal+Statement+on+Cryptoassets+and+Smart+Contracts%22+2019+UKJT
Umaternate, A., & Lie, G. (2026). Analisis Yuridis Peran Kurator Dalam Pengurusan Dan Pemberesan Harta Pailit Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan Dan Pkpu. NUSANTARA: Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial, 13(1), 69–78.
UNITED, U. (2023). UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency with Guide to Enactment and Interpretation.
Tulip Trading Ltd v Bitcoin Association for BSV & Ors, (2023). https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2023/83.html
Wales, L. C. of E. and. (2023). Digital Assets: Final Report. Law Commission. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Digital+Assets%3A+Final+Report%22+%22Law+Commission%22+2023
Warren, E., Westbrook, J. L., Porter, K., & Pottow, J. (2014). The Law of Debtors and Creditors: Text, Cases, and Problems (7th ed.). Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. https://hls.harvard.edu/bibliography/the-law-of-debtors-and-creditors-text-cases-and-problems/
Watson, A. (1993). Legal Transplants: An Approach to Comparative Law (2nd ed.). University of Georgia Press. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Legal+Transplants+An+Approach+to+Comparative+Law+Alan+Watson+1993
Wu, H., Yao, Q., Liu, Z., Huang, B., Zhuang, Y., Tang, H., & Liu, E. (2024). Blockchain for finance: A survey. IET Blockchain, 4(2), 101–123.
Yan, M. (2025). FinTech: Finance, Technology and Regulation. By Ross P. Buckley, Douglas W. Arner and Dirk A. Zetzsche.[Cambridge University Press, 2024. xx+ 330 pp. Paperback£ 29.99. ISBN 978-1-00907-821-4.]. The Cambridge Law Journal, 84(2), 464–470.
In re Voyager Digital Holdings, Inc., (2022). https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22In+re+Voyager+Digital+Holdings%22+22-10943
In re Celsius Network LLC, (2023). https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22In+re+Celsius+Network+LLC%22+647+B.R.+631+2023
Yuspin, W., & Wicaksono, A. (2023). Telaah Yuridis Perlindungan Konsumen Dalam Kegiatan Investasi Aset Kripto Di Indonesia. DiH: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 19(1), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.30996/dih.v19i1.7886
Zetzsche, D. A., Buckley, R. P., Arner, D. W., & Barberis, J. (2018). From FinTech to TechFin: The Regulatory Challenges of Data-Driven Finance. New York University Journal of Law & Business, 14(2), 393–446. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2959925
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Yalid, Yeni Triana, Irawan Harahap, Riantika Pratiwi, Emir Adzan Syazali
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
