AbstractThis article aimed to study the effectiveness of the implementation of Article 18 of Law Number 8 of 1999about Consumer Protection (UUPK) against Exoneration Clause in banking loan agreement aiming toprotect the debtor. The inclusion of unilateral clause by the creditor in standard contract result in imbalanceof position between the parties because creditor has higher economic position as fund provider comparedwith debtor as the one needing fund. For that reason, there should be a law protection for the debtoragainst exoneration clause in standard contract in the implementation of loan agreement to achieve thebalance position between debtor and creditor.This study employed a normative-empirical (applied lawresearch) law research method in an evaluative research method with descriptive research nature. Thisresearch employed a qualitative method with primary data source and secondary data source includingprimary, secondary and tertiary law materials. Techniques of collecting data used were interview andsupporting document study.The article showed that to anticipate the violation against Article 18 of UUPKincluded in Standard Contract of BRI was governed in Law Division’s Letter to BRI Selindo No. B245-SIU/SPH/HKM/09/2000 dated on October 3, 2000 about Law No.8 of 1999 about Consumer Protection.Considering the result of the research, it could be found that the law protection for the debtor after theenactment of UUPK was conducted by preventive measures before the debtor and Ngawi Branch ofPT. Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero) entered into a loan agreement and by imposing criminal, civileducation and awareness of law were low. Although in loan agreement, the public was considered asunderstanding the law because of high demand for loaning fund for their survival. For that reason, theimplementation of Article 18 of UUPK against exoneration clause was less effective in protecting thedebtor in Ngawi Branch of PT. Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero).Keywords: Consumer Protection, Exoneration Clause, Loan Agreement