INDONESIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Nico Angelo Putra Mooduto, Mahareksha Singh Dillon, Talitha Amanda Ekadhani and Bagas Ananta, SSEK Law Firm
Introduction Indonesia’s legal landscape in 2025 is marked by transformative judicial and institutional develop- ments that redefine the country’s dispute resolution framework. A series of landmark Constitutional and Supreme Court decisions – coupled with the release of new arbitration rules by BANI – have clarified long- standing ambiguities in arbitration law, strengthened judicial impartiality standards, and modernised the treatment of defamation and employment disputes. These developments collectively reflect Indonesia’s drive to enhance legal certainty, align domestic prac- tice with international standards, and reinforce public trust in the justice system. For businesses and practi- tioners alike, the changes carry far-reaching practical consequences – affecting contract drafting, enforce- ment strategies, and litigation risk management. This article highlights four key milestones: • the Constitutional Court’s ruling eliminating the “deemed to be” clause from the Arbitration Law; • BANI’s adoption of modern procedural tools to streamline arbitral practice; • the Supreme Court’s conflict-of-interest framework ensuring judicial neutrality; and • the Constitutional Court’s narrowing of criminal defamation and hate speech provisions as well as its clarification of employment dispute time limits. Together, these reforms underscore Indonesia’s com- mitment to procedural fairness, transparency, and global best practice – establishing a clearer founda- tion for both domestic and cross-border dispute reso- lution. Clarifying the Scope of International Arbitration – The Constitutional Court’s Landmark Decision in Arbitration Arbitration has long been an important mechanism for dispute resolution in Indonesia, particularly in com- mercial and cross-border contexts. However, ques- tions about the definition of “international” arbitral awards have plagued practitioners and clients for years. Article 1 (9) of the Arbitration Law contained the phrase “deemed to be”, which created a pathway for certain awards rendered in Indonesia to be treated as international. This ambiguity created unpredictability
in enforcement proceedings and allowed parties to engage in jurisdictional manoeuvring. The concern for businesses was straightforward: uncertainty about whether a domestic award might be treated as international created enforcement risks. Some parties deliberately drafted arbitration clauses hoping to exploit the ambiguity, while others were caught by surprise when their awards faced chal- lenges in enforcement proceedings. In January 2025, the Constitutional Court issued Deci- sion No 100/PUU-XXII/2024, striking out the “deemed to be” phrase. The Court affirmed the principle of ter- ritorial jurisdiction: an award is only international if it is rendered outside Indonesia. Domestic awards, regardless of the nationality of the parties or the gov- erning law of the contract, remain domestic. For clients, the practical consequences are significant: • Greater Clarity: The decision provides certainty for drafting arbitration clauses. Parties now know that only awards seated abroad will be considered international. • Reduced Flexibility: Parties lose the option of treat- ing certain Indonesian-seated awards as interna- tional, limiting creative structuring but ensuring consistency. • Alignment with Global Practice: The decision aligns Indonesia more closely with international standards under the 1958 New York Convention, reducing potential conflicts with foreign jurisdictions. Businesses entering cross-border contracts should review existing arbitration clauses and ensure that the chosen arbitral seat aligns with their enforcement objectives. The decision is expected to reduce litigation over the classification of awards and align Indonesia more closely with international standards such as the 1985 New York Convention. It also reinforces the impor- tance of choosing a foreign arbitral seat where cross- border enforcement may be required.
476 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook