Conceptual Reconstruction of Directors' Responsibilities in Limited Liability Company Bankruptcy Based on Fiduciary Duty and Business Judgment Rule

The dynamics of directors' responsibilities in the bankruptcy of limited liability companies present complex normative problems due to the disharmony between the corporate law regime and bankruptcy law. Corporate law emphasizes managerial discretion through the principles of fiduciary duty and the business judgment rule, while bankruptcy law is more oriented towards protecting the collective interests of creditors. This paradigm difference gives rise to ambiguity in determining the limits of directors' responsibilities, especially when the company is in a phase of financial distress or approaching insolvency. This study aims to analyze the doctrinal conflict that occurs between fiduciary duty, the business judgment rule, and the bankruptcy regime, and to formulate a conceptual reconstruction that can create a balance between director protection and legal accountability. The research method used is normative legal research with a statutory, conceptual, and analytical approach, through a study of Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies and Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations, as well as an analysis of legal doctrine and the development of corporate governance theory. The research findings identify normative disharmony as the root cause of uncertainty in the standards for assessing directors' responsibilities. The proposed conceptual reconstruction includes a reinterpretation of fiduciary duty toward a stakeholder-sensitive approach through the concept of dual fiduciary obligation, a repositioning of the business judgment rule as a process-based evaluation, and the development of an integrative model for corporate governance and insolvency governance. The formulation of new standards, such as threshold liability, a safe harbor for restructuring decisions, and an early warning governance mechanism, is expected to provide more balanced legal certainty. This research provides theoretical contributions to the development of the doctrine of directors' responsibilities and normative recommendations for future regulatory harmonization.