INDONESIA Law and Practice Contributed by: Winnie Yamashita Rolindrawan, Bianca Putri Kadarisman and Qafaldi Putra Ismayudha, SSEK Law Firm
5. Decentralised Finance 5.1 Ability to Use DeFi DeFi in Indonesia
Exemptions and Reverse Solicitation There are no formal exemptions to the licensing requirement for cross-border service providers. Reverse solicitation does not provide reliable pro- tection in Indonesia, as the practical risk of platform access being blocked continues regardless of which party initiated contact. Reliance on reverse solicitation as a basis for serving Indonesian consumers without a licence carries significant regulatory risk given the OJK’s active enforcement stance. Marketing of Digital Assets There are no marketing restrictions in Indonesia spe- cifically directed at digital assets themselves. Appli- cable marketing restrictions are directed at licensed Digital Financial Asset Traders and relate to how they promote their services. In particular, Digital Financial Asset Traders are prohibited from representing that crypto-asset investments are guaranteed to generate profits or are free from the risk of loss. General Indone- sian consumer protection and advertising standards also apply to marketing activities in the digital asset sector. 4.2 White Labelling White-label arrangements in the digital financial asset sector are not expressly addressed under OJK Reg 27/2024, as amended. Given that the licensing obli- gation attaches to the activity conducted rather than the specific commercial model used, a white-label arrangement through which an unlicensed entity pro- vides regulated services to Indonesian consumers using an existing licensed entity’s licence would need to be carefully structured to ensure the licensed entity retains full regulatory responsibility and control. Any arrangement that effectively results in an unli- censed entity providing regulated services to Indo- nesian consumers risks being viewed by the OJK as a circumvention of the licensing requirement. Parties considering such arrangements should seek specific regulatory guidance from the OJK before implemen- tation.
Decentralised finance is not yet explicitly regulated in Indonesia. There is no dedicated regulatory frame- work addressing DeFi activities, and the existing digi- tal financial asset framework under OJK Reg 27/2024, as amended, does not specifically contemplate DeFi
structures or activities. CeFi Firms and DeFi
Licensed Digital Financial Asset Traders (the primary category of centralised finance entities in the Indone- sian crypto-asset context) are permitted to engage in activities beyond their core licensed activities, subject to prior OJK approval. This provides a potential path- way for licensed Traders to incorporate DeFi-related elements into their service offerings. There is no established precedent regarding the terms on which such approval would be granted, and any DeFi-related product or service would be subject to OJK review. 5.2 DeFi Structures As DeFi is not yet explicitly regulated in Indonesia, there are no established corporate structures used specifically for operating DeFi activities in the country. Decentralised autonomous organisations and similar structures do not have a recognised legal form under Indonesian law. Any entity wishing to engage in DeFi- related activities in Indonesia would need to operate through a recognised legal entity and, where those activities constitute regulated digital financial asset activities, would need to obtain the relevant OJK licence or approval. 5.3 Liability As DeFi is not yet explicitly regulated in Indonesia, there is no established judicial or regulatory guid- ance addressing accountability and liability for harm caused by DeFi activities. No significant enforcement actions relating to DeFi have been reported in Indo- nesia to date. In the absence of a specific framework, claims arising from DeFi-related activities would need to be assessed under Indonesia’s general civil and commercial law, which is not designed to address the specific characteristics of decentralised protocols. This represents a significant area of legal uncertainty
320 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook