By Muhammad Syamsudin
The world of sharia and conventional banking often experiences uncertainty in decision making as the possibility of bad credit due to natural disasters. As a financial intermediary, the two banking channels are forced to follow a number of regulations governing the credit. When a bank decides to disburse funds to a number of customers who are debtors, it is like throwing a coin into the air without knowing which side will win. The chance that might occur is victory () side of the owner of the capital (bank) and on the other hand is the humanity side ( loss) for creditors. If there is a position gain then banking survival will be safe. However, if a loss occurs banks must risk their survival for the future.
If faced with a natural disaster, then the side of the gain cannot be expected over a period of time short time. The side loss became one of the biggest focus of attention. As an effort to resolve it, a bank is forced to involve a number of competent authorities, such as auditors, financial service authorities, and the role of the government in decision making. On the one hand, banks are required to provide their humanity to customers who experience destiny that is not desired by all parties.
For the example of a case that was once known by the author, was the eruption of Mount Kelud on Thursday, February 13, 2013, several years ago. The effects of the eruption not only cause loss of life and property but are believed to leave many problems. Not only does the real sector of the banking experience it, but also the question of the future fate of the victims who are banking customers.
Victims of Mount Kelud's customers consist of small micro business community members such as farmers, traders, breeders and so on, as if -will feel lost hope for the future of his business that has been unclear at least in a certain period of time. They are worried about their ability to pay installments on bank debt that usually mature at the end of the planting period, which is approximately in the range of July, just before the dry season. This concern is increasing as a number of collateral that is likely to be confiscated by the bank, due to the default of the dependents. Not only that, for customers who have failed to pay twice the planting season or even more, can be threatened with blacklisting (1945 19457) blacklist by banks in line with defaults which they do inadvertently.
An interesting note related to the Manado floods and the eruption of Mount Sinabung, the OJK (Financial Services Authority) once issued special treatment to its customers' debtors who were part of the victims. This special treatment also applies to all areas affected by natural disasters and bailed out by Islamic banking through a financing system mudharabah musyarakah receivables – such as murabahah greetings and istishna ' – ijarah (leasing) and qardh (loans) and several other financing models. It was noted that the special treatment occurred for three years from the beginning of the disaster. This policy refers to Bank Indonesia Regulation Number 8/15 / PBI / 2006 dated October 5, 2006 concerning special treatment of bank credit for certain regions in Indonesia that have experienced natural disasters. This rule was issued to coincide with the eruption of Mount Merapi.
For victims of the Mount Merapi eruption in Yogyakarta, Bank Indonesia (BI) gave certain special treatment in the form of delaying payment of loan principal installments, including bank interest for a specified period.
So far, the author does not know whether or not there are cases of credit bleaching in the Merapi region, namely the elimination of the entire customer debt. However, if a simple thought is taken, for banks that are included in the SOE (State Owned Enterprises) category only, or commonly referred to as the Red Plate Bank, it will certainly face a dilemma for the case of removing this collection. On the one hand, he was confronted with the case of a corporation, namely seeking state profits, but on the other hand, the humanitarian factor which made him considered to have caused the state harm was caused by the disbursement of the state treasury to bad credit customers due to disasters.
This ambiguity inevitably forcing them to consult with the House of Representatives (DPR) to survive the accusation of harming the state treasury, which is actually enough with the decision of the Minister of Finance alone. Perhaps, this consultation was influenced by concerns about regime change that could have done a different reading of the regime that was replaced. So, then prefer direct consultation with the DPR which is a representative of the people's representatives.
Given the experience of the Financial Services Authority above and played by Bank Indonesia, in the event of natural disasters in several parts of Indonesia, such as in West Nusa Tenggara (NTB) and Central Sulawesi, there is the possibility of the same forced policy implemented at the disaster points. Some forms of credit payment relief by rescheduling the maturity of the debtor repayment are absolutely necessary. Moreover, the severity of the impact of the disaster which until some time will not seem to be eliminated in the future. Especially when comparing some of the damage caused by the Kelud eruption, until the eruption of Merapi, compared to the damage caused by the tsunami in Palu, it seems far more severe in Palu. Because, in Palu, a customer not only lost his livelihood, but also lost his place of residence. The writer as one of the eyewitnesses who have seen and felt for themselves the impact of the Kelud eruption must be honest in this forum. Consideration of the sense of humanity that led to debtor debt bleaching seemed more feasible for victims of the Palu tsunami and the NTB earthquake. Wallāhu a'all could have answered .
The author was an Activist of Applied Fiqh Studies and Caregivers PP Hasan Jufri Putri, P. Bawean, East Java
This Article was Published On: NU Online