TUGAS 2

NAMA : Cholis Akbar Mutaqin

Mr. Yanto, a successful entrepreneur in his city, passed away at the age of 65. His sudden
departure shocked his family, especially his children, Tina, Rudi, and Andi. Mr. Yanto owned
numerous assets, including a corporation, real estate, and other investments. However, he died
intestate, leaving his estate to be distributed according to the applicable inheritance law.

The conflict arose when Rudi, the second child who had worked alongside his father in the
family business, claimed that he was the most entitled to the inheritance. "I have dedicated my
life to this company," he stated during a family meeting. "Without me, this company would not
have grown this big."

Tina, the eldest child who worked as a doctor in another city, disagreed. "Inheritance is our
collective right, Rudi. We must divide it equitably," she argued. Meanwhile, Andi, the youngest,
who was still in college, felt caught between his older siblings. He was unfamiliar with business
law or estate law, but he knew that this dispute could permanently damage their family ties.

The family ultimately decided to take the matter to court, filing a lawsuit to request that the
judge determine the distribution of the estate based on legal provisions. The court assigned an
experienced judge in inheritance disputes to oversee the case.

During the trial, the judge explained that under Indonesian inheritance law, all legitimate heirs
have an equal right to their parents' estate. Even though Rudi had contributed significantly to
the business, this did not automatically entitle him to a larger share of the inheritance, unless a
last will and testament stipulated otherwise—which, in this case, did not exist.

However, Rudi did not give up. He presented evidence showing that he had invested his own
money into the company, significantly increasing its value. His legal counsel argued that this
contribution should be considered in the probate process.

Tina countered by submitting documents proving that their father had provided equal financial
support to all three of them throughout their lives, without favoritism. The litigation became
prolonged, with both parties presenting increasingly intense arguments. Tina and Rudi each
believed they were the most deserving heir, while Andi felt overwhelmed and unsure which
side to support.

Amid the tension, the family’s attorney, Ms. Siti, suggested mediation. "The court can rule
based on the law, but your family bond may be irreparably broken," she advised. "Perhaps it
would be better for you all to sit down together and find a settlement agreement that satisfies
everyone."

The family agreed to attempt mediation. With the help of a neutral mediator, they worked
toward a resolution outside of the courtroom. Through mediation, they realized that the core
issue was not about assets or financial gain, but about mutual respect and acknowledgment of
each other's contributions.

Rudi eventually recognized that while his efforts had been significant in growing the business,
his familial relationship was far more valuable. Likewise, Tina acknowledged that although
they were co-heirs, Rudi had devoted more time and effort to the family business.

After multiple mediation sessions, they reached a mutual agreement. Rudi would receive a
larger share of the business due to his active role, while Tina and Andi would receive equal
compensation in the form of real estate and other investments. This agreement was not only
accepted by all parties but also preserved their family unity.

In the end, the judge ratified the settlement as a court ruling. Although the case began with
tension and legal disputes, Mr. Yanto’s family successfully resolved it in a way that kept their
bond intact. They learned that in matters of inheritance, justice is not only about the equal
division of wealth, but also about recognizing contributions and maintaining family harmony.
They moved forward, cherishing the memory of their father and understanding that, no matter
what, family must always come first.

Soal:
1. Refleksi 10 kata kunci dari cerita dibawah ini!
2. Teknik membaca apa yang anda gunakan? apa alasan anda menggunakan teknik tersebut?
JAWABAN
1. Identifikasi 10 Kata Kunci
 Inheritance (Warisan)
 Mr. Yanto (Tokoh utama)
 Entrepreneur (Pengusaha)
 Children/siblings (Anak-anak)
 Assets (Aset)
 Company (Perusahaan)
 Court/trial (Pengadilan)
 Law/legal (Hukum)
 Rights (Hak)
 Family conflict (Konflik keluarga)

2. Teknik yang paling sesuai: Scanning dan Skimming, alasan scanning diperlukan untuk:
 Menemukan informasi spesifik
 Mengidentifikasi kata kunci
 Mencari detail penting dengan cepat
Skimming diperlukan untuk:
 Mendapatkan gambaran umum cerita
 Memahami alur konflik
 Menghemat waktu karena dibatasi satu kali membaca
Sesuai dengan batasan waktu (hanya boleh membaca sekali). Efektif untuk menemukan
kata kunci. Memungkinkan pembaca mendapatkan inti cerita dengan cepat. Cocok untuk
teks naratif yang Panjang. Teknik membaca yang digunakan adalah kombinasi Scanning
dan Skimming karena, memenuhi kebutuhan mencari kata kunci dengan cepat, sesuai
dengan batasan membaca sekali, efektif untuk memahami inti cerita, memungkinkan
pembaca fokus pada informasi penting tanpa terjebak detail yang tidak perlu.