/2023/06/25/1477852088p.jpg)
Christian mentioned that unless the OJK can guarantee that liquidation will be able to return 100% of the policyholders' money, of course, revoking the business license is not a problem for the policyholders.
Reflecting on the liquidation case of Wanaartha Life Insurance, he believes that the result of liquidation only distributes the existing company assets, there is no effort to find assets outside the company assets. Thus, the policyholders' money may not be fully returned.
Christian conveyed that the OJK should be on the side of the policyholders and strive so that the policyholders' money can be returned maximally, not just thinking about how the case of the insurance company's failure to pay that it supervises can be quickly resolved by distributing the not-so-much assets.
He reiterated that the SOL scheme is better for both parties, whether policyholders or Kresna Life.
Read Also: Pemegang Polis Merasa Dirugikan Atas Keputusan OJK Cabut Izin Usaha Kresna Life
"We consider Kresna Life quite committed to carrying out the agreement made. If they are given the opportunity and they are not committed, of course, they already know the risks and can be subject to criminal penalties until the company can collapse completely," said Christian.
Meanwhile, Insurance Observer Irvan Rahardjo in his testimony believes that the failure of an insurance company to pay does not happen instantly, but through a series of supervisions that are the authority of the OJK. He said that every period the insurance company is obliged to submit a report on the health condition and management of the company to the OJK.
"The OJK that does not take supervisory action against companies that violate provisions, but directly revokes business licenses shows that the OJK, which has authority, has not fully fulfilled its obligations. Thus, the decision issued by the OJK in the form of revoking a business license for an insurance company can be sued by policyholders whose interests are harmed by the decision," he said.
Read Also: Pemegang Polis Kresna Life Gugat OJK ke PTUN Soal Cabut Izin Usaha, Ini Alasannya
Irvan explained that the SOL scheme implemented by Kresna Life as a form of restructuring cannot be canceled by anyone because it is a manifestation of freedom of contract or the principle of pacta sunt servanda which is regulated in article 1338 of the Civil Code and OJK regulations.
If later the revocation of the business license no longer applies, Irvan predicts that Kresna Life can operate normally again. This is because the public considers the Controlling Shareholder (Michael Steven) has good intentions by signing the SOL, to which 90% of policyholders agree. In addition, Michael Steven has never run away.
This is certainly different when compared to the Wanaartha Life case where the Controlling Shareholder ran away and could not be held accountable.
Read Also: Kasus Dugaan Penggelapan Kresna Life Menimbulkan 278 Korban & Kerugian Rp 431 Miliar
"If Kresna Life is restored to operate again by transferring the policy debt to SOL as participation, then theoretically their Risk-Based Capital (RBC) will recover. With the recovery of the RBC, they can invite investors so that the company can operate normally," Irvan told Kontan.
Meanwhile, the OJK stated that it has received information about the PTUN ruling on the cancellation of Kresna Life's business license revocation. However, it will still be studied first.
"We have received the information, but we are still waiting for the decision letter to study the ruling and to prepare the next steps," revealed the Deputy Commissioner of Insurance, Guarantee, and Pension Fund Supervision of the OJK, Iwan Pasila, to Kontan.
