NOTARIAL URGENCY IN GENERAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS OF LISTED ISSUERS

General meeting of shareholders stands as the apex organ of a limited liability company, yet for issuers listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange this forum increasingly fails the very investors it exists to serve. Physical venues are routinely capped at arbitrary numbers, some no larger than two hundred seats, without a published queueing protocol or a transparent closure procedure. Shareholders holding valid proof of ownership have been turned away by security personnel hours before the scheduled opening, a practice that sits uneasily beside issuers whose free float now exceeds seventy percent of outstanding shares. This article examines the urgency of notarial involvement in general meetings of shareholders of listed issuers as a guarantor of procedural justice, and asks how the physical and electronic procedure for convening such meetings ought to be structured. Employing a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual and comparative approaches, the study places Indonesian law, principally Law Number 40 of 2007 on Limited Liability Companies, the Notary Law and Financial Services Authority Regulation Number 14 of 2025, against the practice of Singapore, Japan, China, the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany and France. Three authentication models emerge from this comparison: a notarial model shared by Indonesia and Germany, a professional-witness model practised in China, and a self-certification model found across the common-law jurisdictions examined and France.