The Dispute Resolution Review: Indonesia
Introduction to the dispute resolution framework
i Structure of law
The Republic of Indonesia inherited most of its legal system from the Dutch colonies. Indonesia is a civil law country and is characterised by codified legal provisions, and written laws and regulations are the primary sources of law.
The formulation of laws in Indonesia is carried out in accordance with Law No. 12 of 2011 on Formulation of Laws and Regulations as last amended by Law No. 15 of 2019. This Law stipulates the type and hierarchy of Indonesian laws and regulations as follows:
- the 1945 Constitution;
- the Decree of the People's Consultative Assembly;
- law, or government regulation in lieu of law;
- government regulation;
- presidential regulation;
- provincial regulation; and
- regency or municipality regulation.
The foregoing hierarchy must be understood in conjunction with the principle of lex superior derogat legi inferiori (a law higher in the hierarchy repeals the lower one). The purpose of this principle is to ensure conformity with all of the laws and regulations listed in the hierarchy.
Although Indonesia does not acknowledge the binding force of precedents, former precedents that have frequently been referred to in adjudicating similar cases are considered to have persuasive power among judges. If judges find such a precedent to be relevant to a case, they will refer to it in the final ruling of the case, and thus judges have the choice of whether to follow a precedent or not.
Another aspect of precedents in Indonesia is they tend to set a trend in understanding laws and regulations. In some cases, precedents may provide a fully different interpretation of laws and regulations – compared to the one provided by the relevant laws and regulations – on the grounds of equity or public policy. This often provokes concerns about the degree of legal certainty in Indonesia. However, some precedents may also be worthy of appreciation owing to their ground-breaking legal importance.
In addition, customary laws and shariah law also influence the Indonesian legal system. The above laws are applicable with the following limitations:
- customary laws only prevail to the extent that they do not contravene prevailing written laws and regulations; and
- shariah law only prevails for:
- civil matters stipulated under the prevailing laws and regulations (e.g., marriage and inheritance for Muslims); and
- regions stipulated under the prevailing laws and regulations (i.e., the province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam).
ii Structure of courts
The judiciary of Indonesia comprises the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. The Constitutional Court holds the authority to conduct a constitutional review of laws, which may result in revocation of certain provisions or the whole law if it is found to contravene the 1945 Constitution. As for regulations having hierarchy below the laws, the Supreme Court has the authority to review whether a regulation contradicts certain laws that again may result in certain provisions or the whole regulation being annulled by the Supreme Court.
Aside from the above, the Supreme Court serves as the highest court of appeal for the following judicial bodies:
- general courts whose jurisdiction encompasses civil and criminal cases;
- state administrative courts that deal with state administrative disputes;
- religious courts that have jurisdiction over civil disputes between Muslims, for example, marriage and inheritance law, and economic shariah law; and
- military courts whose jurisdiction covers military criminal cases and military administrative cases.
Any party conducting a dispute through these Indonesian courts (unless stipulated otherwise under certain laws) should do so in the following order: the district courts (first instance), the High Courts (appeal) then the Supreme Court (cassation).
Judgments rendered by district courts may be appealed to the relevant High Courts, whether on a ground of legal issues or factual issues.2 The disputing parties may also file a petition for cassation against High Court judgments; however, the grounds for such petition for cassation are limited to issues pertaining to the application of law.
Save for cassation judgments, all district court judgments and High Court judgments shall not be deemed as final and binding unless all available legal recourse has been exhausted. However, under the procedural laws, even a final and binding decision may also be appealed through an extraordinary legal recourse (a case review) at the Supreme Court. In this regard, the grounds for filing a case review are limitative and must be submitted within a specific time period in accordance with the prevailing laws and regulations.
iii Framework of arbitration and alternative dispute resolution
Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in Indonesia is mainly regulated through the Arbitration Law.3 The Arbitration Law defines ADR as an institution for the resolution of disputes or differences of opinion through procedures agreed by the parties, namely resolutions outside the courts by:
- conciliation; or
- expert assessment.
The Arbitration Law does not provide detailed rules and procedures for conducting ADR. The disputing parties are at liberty to choose the ADR rules and procedures.
Although the same principle applies to virtually every ADR, rules and procedures of court-annexed mediation are strictly regulated under the Supreme Court Regulation.4
In Indonesia, the Arbitration Law also serves as lex arbitri. As such, all arbitration proceedings conducted in Indonesia must not contradict the provisions of the Arbitration Law.
Even though Indonesia has ratified the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, international arbitral awards5 are enforced in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration Law.6
Indonesia has also been a signatory to the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID Convention) since 1968. However, Indonesia excludes disputes arising from state administrative decisions issued by regencies from the types of dispute that may be settled by the ICSID.7
The year in review
i Setback in the execution mechanism of fiduciary object following the issuance of a Constitutional Court decision
Under Indonesian law, there are several security rights that can be adopted by a loan agreement to secure a debt repayment. Among these is a fiduciary security whose object may be in the form of movable goods (either tangible or intangible) or immovable goods that cannot be encumbered with mortgage securities. The main advantage of adopting a fiduciary security is that the debtor may still retain possession of the relevant fiduciary objects while trying to repay its debt.8 The implementation of a fiduciary security is not without any benefit for the creditor. In the case of default, the creditor may opt to execute the fiduciary object on its own authority through a public auction (also known as parate executie).9 These make the fiduciary right a dependable mechanism for both the debtor and the creditor whenever there is a requirement for collateral in a certain loan transaction.
Despite the foregoing, on 6 January 2020, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that shifted understanding on the implementation of parate executie.10 In its consideration, the Constitutional Court held that the implementation of parate executie is prone to arbitrary actions from the creditor because it grants the creditor with an exclusive right to execute the fiduciary object in the event of default, yet it does not provide the debtor with an opportunity to plead against such allegation of default. With that in mind, the Constitutional Court asserted that parate executie may only be performed if there is an agreement (between the creditor and the debtor) on the occurrence of the default. Otherwise, if there is a rebuttal from the debtor on the alleged default, the creditor may only execute the fiduciary object by filing a petition to the authorised court.
The Constitutional Court may put its concerns regarding arbitrary actions from the creditor, which often occurs in practice. Nonetheless, the Constitutional Court should have reconsidered the impact of its decision on the debtor's attitude once he or she is in default. The decision might trigger the debtor to make up excuses to prolong the execution process in bad faith. Aside from making the execution process longer and more costly, this may eventually trigger more reluctance from the creditor to provide loans if the collateral is given in the form of fiduciary security, which further may affect economic growth in Indonesia, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises.
ii Debt under the Indonesian Bankruptcy Law to encompass the handover of multistory-housing unit ownership certificates
The Indonesian Bankruptcy Law allows a creditor to file a suspension of a debt payment obligation (PKPU) if it foresees that the debtor will be unable to repay a due and payable debt.11 In that regard, the Bankruptcy Law provides a broad definition of what is considered as debt, namely it may be in the form of any obligation that:
- is determined or can be determined in a certain amount of money;
- is either direct or contingent; and
- derives from either an agreement or laws and regulations.12
Despite such an extensive definition, in practice, it appears that a PKPU is still predominated by cases involving non-performing loans.
A rather unique case has emerged through the handing down of Decision No. 110/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2020/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst. In this case, a PKPU was filed by buyers to an apartment developer for its failure to hand over a multistory-housing unit ownership certificate (SHMSRS) in a timely manner. On the contrary, the apartment developer denied the PKPU and argued that the handover of the SHMSRS cannot be considered as debt under the Bankruptcy Law. The Central Jakarta District Court ended up accepting the PKPU on the consideration that the definition of debt should be construed in a broader sense, and should encompass the obligation to hand over certain items and to perform or not perform certain actions.
On one side, the foregoing decision may bring a bit of fresh air to buyers who encounter serious delays in obtaining an SHMSRS from apartment developers. On the other side, however, the filing of a PKPU on that ground might seem to be quite extreme. This is because, once a restructuring plan is agreed under the PKPU regime, failure in complying with such plan may expose the debtor to a risk of bankruptcy.13 Moreover, despite being less efficient, resolving an issue of delay in handing over an SHMSRS can actually be done by filing a default lawsuit at the relevant court instead of a PKPU.
With that in mind, it is inevitable that a PKPU might be used (to some extent) by a group of creditors to facilitate 'bad interest' that has no relation at all to the handing over of SHMSRS, such as intentionally disrupting the debtor's business.
iii Job Creation Law: a shorter process for employment termination?
On 2 November 2020, the government issued Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation, which has made various amendments to several laws. Among those amendments, one that may draw attention pertains to employment termination. It appears that the Job Creation Law has cut off the employment termination process that has long been known to be costly and lengthy in requiring an employer to obtain a court stipulation before performing any termination and to keep fulfilling the employment obligation during the course of the termination proceedings. This applies unless there has been an agreement, among the employer and the employee, on employment termination.14
Unlike the previous law, the Job Creation Law allowed an employer to notify an employee of his or her termination in the first place (by specifying the reason). Despite there being no clear stipulation that termination shall be effective following the notification, the Job Creation Law might be open to such an interpretation. This is because the Job Creation Law has repleaded the provisions that are often referred to as the basis for the requirement of court stipulation (Articles 152 and 155 of Law No. 13 of 2003 on Manpower).
Regardless of the foregoing, at the end of the day, this will all depend on the court's interpretation as to when the employment termination shall be deemed effective.
i Overview of court procedure
The official language to be used in the court proceedings is Indonesian. A civil court case is commenced by filing a lawsuit that is addressed to the chair of the relevant district court – in general, the district court whose jurisdiction encompasses the defendant's domicile. The lawsuit must comprise factual grounds and legal bases, and prayer for relief (where the plaintiff describes the remedies that he or she is seeking from the court).
After the filing of a lawsuit, the chair of the district court appoints the examining panel of judges. The panel of judges determines the first hearing date and summons the defendant to appear before the court.
In the first hearing, the panel of judges verifies the parties' credentials and orders the parties to enter into a court-annexed mediation process. If the mediation process fails, the court will proceed with the pronouncement of the lawsuit and allow the defendant to produce a statement of defence consisting of a demurrer and response to the case merits. The demurrer section may contain a challenge to the court's competence, the formality of the lawsuit, or both.
At the same time, the laws also provide the defendant with the right to file a counterclaim against the plaintiff.
Afterwards, the plaintiff may file a counter plea against the defendant's statement of defence and a statement of defence against the defendant's counterclaim (if any). Subsequently, the defendant is given the right to submit a rejoinder against the plaintiff's counter plea and a counter plea against the plaintiff's statement of defence in the counterclaim (if any). For final submissions, the court gives the opportunity for the plaintiff to lodge a rejoinder against the defendant's counter plea in a counterclaim.
Before proceeding to the evidentiary process, the court shall render an interlocutory judgment over the court competence demurrer. If the court grants the court competence demurrer, then the court shall declare the lawsuit to be inadmissible. Otherwise, the court shall proceed with the evidentiary hearing.
In the evidentiary hearing, the judges will provide the widest opportunity for the parties to submit any and all evidence that the parties deem to be relevant and in support of their argument.
Subsequent to the evidentiary process, the court shall provide the opportunity for the parties to submit a written statement of conclusion. After receiving the statement of conclusion, the panel of judges will adjourn the hearing in order for the judges to prepare the judgment, usually within two to four weeks.
The laws provide the litigants with the right to file an appeal to the district court. If the litigants are not satisfied with the judgment of the appeal court, the litigants may also file a cassation petition to the Supreme Court.
ii Time frames
The Supreme Court has been encouraging the district courts to conclude their proceedings within five months and the High Courts to conclude appeal proceedings within three months.15 In practice, however, there have been cases where the district court proceedings take around six to 12 months.
For cassation and case review proceedings, the Supreme Court has determined that such proceedings shall be concluded within 250 days of when the case dossiers are received by the Supreme Court.16 Nonetheless, in practice, owing to its load of cases, it is very rare for the Supreme Court to finish case examination within that period.
iii Class actions
Class actions are permissible only if a claim satisfies the following requirements:
- there are so many group members that it would be ineffective and inefficient if the lawsuit was separately filed or jointly filed;
- there is a similarity of facts or events, legal bases and types of prayer for relief between the representative of the group and its group members; and
- the group representative has the honesty and determination to protect the interests of its group members.
The above requirements will first be assessed by a panel of judges to determine whether the class action may proceed. Subject to fulfilment of these requirements, the plaintiff will be required to provide a proposal for the notification to the group members. The remaining procedure shall follow the prevailing civil procedural laws.
iv Representation in proceedings
In general, it is a right of the litigants to be represented by lawyers.
All representation, except for a representative in class action proceedings, must be based on a power of attorney. If a power of attorney is executed outside the territory of Indonesia, then it must be consularised at the embassy of Indonesia and notarised in the country where the power of attorney is executed.
v Service out of the jurisdiction and assistance to foreign courts
Indonesia is not a member of any convention pertaining to judicial assistance, and, to date, Indonesia only has mutual judicial assistance with the Kingdom of Thailand. As such, in general, when Indonesian courts are in need of judicial assistance from foreign courts, or the other way around, the procedure will be conducted through a diplomatic channel.
To date, there are no laws and regulations regulating the procedure of service out of the jurisdiction. The same applies to matters concerning assistance to foreign courts.
vi Recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments
A foreign court judgment cannot be enforced in Indonesia. If a party would like to enforce its right based on a foreign court judgment then it must file a new lawsuit at a relevant Indonesian district court (relitigate the case). During the court proceedings, the plaintiff may submit the foreign court judgment to the court as documentary evidence.
vii Access to court files
Indonesian courts have adopted a case tracking system that allows the public to access information regarding ongoing or concluded cases at the relevant court. This includes:
- the date of case registration;
- classification of the case;
- names of the parties;
- prayer for relief;
- the hearing schedule; and
- the administrative cost of the case and its disbursement report by the court.
If a case has been concluded by the first instance court, the case tracking system may publish the names of the judges and the substitute registrar of the case.
Members of the public may obtain an unofficial copy of a court judgment or court decree, but court submissions or pleading documents or evidence are unavailable to the public in principle.
viii Litigation funding
Any practice of litigation funding is not recognised by Indonesian laws and regulations. Some law practitioners argue that litigation funding may raise issues of ethics and may violate decency or any other source of unwritten laws in Indonesia.
i Conflicts of interest and Chinese walls
The Advocates Law17 does not set forth a rule on conflicts of interest. However, the Indonesian Advocate Code of Ethics18 provides a basic rule that an advocate (lawyer) handling the joint interest of two parties is required to fully resign from handling such interest if, in the future, there is a conflict of interest between the relevant parties.
There is no specific provision for explaining this basic rule. Some law practitioners argue that the above rule may be broadly interpreted, and it may depend on the advocate.
Indonesian legal practice does not recognise the concept of Chinese walls, and as such no set of rules provide any definition of Chinese walls.
ii Money laundering, proceeds of crime and funds related to terrorism
For some matters outside litigation or arbitration proceedings, Indonesian advocates are obliged to provide a report on suspicious financial transactions19 to the Indonesian Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Center (PPATK) and apply the principle of know your service user.20
The matters outside litigation or arbitration proceedings are related to:
- the purchase and sale of a property;
- the management of money, stocks or other financial service products;
- the management of a checking account, savings account, deposit account or stocks account;
- the operation and management of a company; and
- the establishment, purchase and sale of legal entities.
Advocates are obliged to apply the principle of know your service user at the following times:
- there is a business or commercial relation with its service user;
- there is a financial transaction in Indonesian rupiahs or foreign currency involving a minimal amount of or equal to 100 million rupiahs;
- there is a suspicious financial transaction relating to money laundering and terrorism funding; or
- the advocate has doubts regarding the truth of the information from its service user.
iii Data protection
The legal framework for personal data protection comprises various laws and regulations.21 The following are considered as protected personal data under Indonesian laws and regulations:
- based on the Public Information Disclosure Law:
- the history and condition of a family member;
- the history, condition, treatment and medication of physical and psychological health;
- finances, assets, income and condition of bank accounts;
- the result of an evaluation in connection with a capability and intellectuality recommendation; and
- records concerning an individual with regard to formal education and non-formal education; and
- pursuant to population administration laws and regulations:
- records of physical or mental disability;
- iris recognition;
- other data elements regarding a person that are considered unacceptable;
- citizen identification numbers;
- place and date of birth;
- parent names;
- home addresses;
- records on marriage, as well as the date and status of a marriage;
- records on divorce as well as the date of a divorce;
- blood type;
- records concerning children born outside of marriage;
- records on adoption;
- type of work;
- past education; and
- ownership of deed of birth or marriage.
Government and private institutions are prohibited from making personal data public information. Specifically for personal data in electronic systems, the Indonesian Minister of Communication and Informatics has issued a regulation that specifies that the protection of personal data includes protection of the acquisition, collection, processing, analysis, storage, appearance, announcement, transmission, dissemination and destruction of personal data.
Documents and the protection of privilege
The Advocates Law provides that advocates have the right of confidentiality regarding their relationship with their clients, including protection of materials and documents against seizure or examination measures, and protection against recording or tapping of electronic communications.
The Indonesian Advocates Code of Ethics further provides that letters sent by advocates to other advocates in a case may be presented before the judges unless they are made without prejudice. In addition, advocate-to-advocate correspondence or contents of conversations in a failed attempt of amicable settlement shall not be presented as evidence before the court.
The Advocates Law and Indonesian Advocates Code of Ethics are silent on whether their provisions may also be applied to in-house lawyers.
ii Production of documents in civil proceedings
In principle, a party asserting or rebutting a right or entitlement is obliged to prove it based on the available evidence. The law does not require the disputing parties to produce all documents or evidence relevant to a case; as such, it fully depends on the parties' strategy and possession of documents.
Indonesian civil procedure laws consider written evidence as primary evidence. To be accepted by the court, the parties must be able to present the original written evidence before the court because, under Indonesian civil procedure law, the power of written evidence lies within its originals.
Indonesian civil procedure law provides that a party may request judges to order the opponent to submit letters or documents belonging to the disputing parties concerning matters being disputed if such letters or documents are possessed by the opponent.22 Nonetheless, in practice, the foregoing provision has rarely, if ever, been invoked by Indonesian litigants. As such, in practice, the disputing parties rely on any evidence in their possession to prove their right or to rebut the opponent's arguments.
Alternatives to litigation
In Indonesia, arbitration is commonly used to resolve commercial disputes involving particular expertise (e.g., construction, capital markets, insurance). Meanwhile, the major arbitral institution commonly used in Indonesia is the Indonesian National Board of Arbitration.
The Arbitration Law categorises arbitration awards according to the place where an arbitration award is rendered. If the arbitration award is rendered outside the jurisdiction of Indonesia, it shall be deemed an international arbitration award. If it is the other way around, the arbitration award shall be deemed a domestic arbitration award.
The Arbitration Law does not recognise the right of appeal against arbitration awards. However, the district court may refuse to enforce the domestic arbitration award for the following reasons:
- the arbitration agreement is absent;
- the dispute is not allowed to be resolved through arbitration; or
- the award violates morality and public policy.
Aside from the above, the Decree of the Directorate General of the General Judiciary No. 40/DJU/SK/HM.02.3./1/2019 of 2019 on the District Court Execution Guideline requires the court to verify whether an international arbitration award has been registered within 30 days of the pronouncement of the award. Unfortunately, the Decree did not come up with any explanation regarding the rationale behind this provision.
The grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement of international arbitration awards under the Arbitration Law are more limited compared to the one provided by the New York Convention.
Moreover, in Indonesia, the disputing parties are entitled to request annulment of an arbitration award on the following grounds:
- letters or documents submitted in the hearing, after the award is rendered, are acknowledged to be false or declared to be forgeries;
- discovery of documents, after the award has been rendered, which are decisive in nature and were deliberately concealed by the opposing party; and
- the award is rendered as a result of fraud committed by one of the parties in the proceedings.
The Arbitration Law does not clearly state that the grounds for annulment are applicable for domestic and international arbitration awards. However, most decisions have declared that Indonesian courts have no jurisdiction to adjudicate matters regarding annulment of international arbitration awards.
There are two types of mediation recognised under Indonesian law; namely, court-annexed mediation and voluntary mediation (non-court mediation). While court-annexed mediation has been used since the Dutch colonial era, non-court mediation was introduced in 1999 through the promulgation of the Arbitration Law.
With regard to court-annexed mediation, the Supreme Court has also issued a regulation pertaining to the Procedure of Court-Annexed Mediation.23
There are two major differences between court-annexed mediation and voluntary mediation, namely:
- court-annexed mediation is mandatory in nature, thus it must be conducted at the preliminary stage of civil court proceedings. On the other hand, voluntary mediation will only be conducted upon the disputing parties' agreement; and
- rules and procedures of court-annexed mediation shall comply with the prevailing laws and regulations, while rules and procedures of voluntary mediation fully depend on the agreement between the disputing parties.
Although mediation has long been recognised by law, it has yet to become as popular as arbitration in terms of alternatives to litigation. This might be for several reasons, including:
- disputing parties are pessimistic that mediation will result in a win-win solution, as their first attempt to negotiate has already failed;
- a settlement agreement remains vulnerable to any violation by the disputing parties that later ends up in court or arbitration proceedings; and
- court-annexed mediation still contains shortcomings, such as a relatively short time period for conducting mediation without considering the degree of complexity of a case (i.e., only 30 business days, with a chance to extend the period by up to another 30 business days with the parties' consent).
Outlook and conclusions
2020 has been a challenging year for Indonesia, mainly due to the covid-19 outbreak. Nonetheless, Indonesia was still able to cope with the situation by (among other things) issuing a number of regulations to keep the judiciary accessible to the public. These regulations include (among others):
- Supreme Court Circular Letter No. 1 of 2020 as last amended by Supreme Court Circular Letter No. 5 of 2020 on Guidance on the Duties Implementation During the Period of Prevention of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) Outbreak within the Environment of the Supreme Court and the Inferior Judiciary; and
- Supreme Court Circular Letter No. 6 of 2020 on Working System within the Environment of the Supreme Court and the Inferior Judiciary During New Normal.
In addition, Indonesia was also able to issue several legal products that hold great importance for national legal development. Among those products are:
- Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation; and
- Decree of the Head of Supreme Court No. 109/KMA/SK/IV/2020 of 2020 on the Implementation of Handbook on the Settlement of Case of Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation.
The Job Creation Law is intended to increase the amount of investment in the future by touching aspects that bear great importance for investors (e.g., taxation, general corporate issues, workforce), while the Handbook on Bankruptcy and PKPU is expected to be able to provide technical clarification to several provisions of the Indonesian Bankruptcy Law.
Regardless of the above, it should be noted that legal products might be in vain if they are not accompanied by proper legal enforcement. With that in mind, in 2021 the government and judiciary shall be expected to be able to bring about the consistent and proper implementation of the legal products that were issued in 2020.
1 Ahmad Irfan Arifin is a litigation partner at Arifin, Purba & Firmansyah. The author wishes to thank firm associate Edgar Christian Martua Raja for his great help in the preparation and editing process of this chapter.
2 In criminal cases, judgments stating that the defendant is acquitted or discharged from all legal charges may not be appealed to the High Courts. The available legal recourse for such judgment is by filing for cassation to the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, filing for cassation against a judgment that acquits a criminal defendant was once prohibited by Article 244 of Indonesian Code of Criminal Procedure until the provision was amended under the ruling of Constitutional Court judgment No. 114/PUU-X/2012 dated 28 March 2013.
3 Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and ADR.
4 Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2016 on Procedure of Court-Annexed Mediation.
5 Under Article 1 Paragraph 9 of the Arbitration Law, international arbitration awards are awards rendered by an arbitration institution or ad hoc arbitration outside the legal jurisdiction of the Republic of Indonesia, or such awards are deemed as international arbitration awards under Indonesian laws and regulations.
6 Articles 65–69 of the Arbitration Law.
7 President Decree No. 31 of 2012 on Disputes Whose Settlement Shall Not Be Submitted to the Jurisdiction of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes.
8 Article 1 Paragraph 2 of Law No. 42 of 1999 on Fiduciary Security.
9 Article 29 Paragraph 1 of Law No. 42 of 1999 on Fiduciary Security.
10 Decision No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019 dated 6 January 2020.
11 Article 222 Paragraph 3 of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation.
12 Article 1 Paragraph 6 of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation.
13 Article 291 in conjunction with Article 170 Paragraph (1), Article 171 and Article 294 of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation.
14 Article 151, 152, and 155 of Law No. 13 of 2003 on Manpower.
15 Circular Letter No. 2 of 2014 on Resolution of Case in The First Instance Court and Appeal at 4 (Four) Types of Judiciary dated 13 March 2014.
16 Decree of the Chairman of Supreme Court Number 214/KMA/SK/XII/2014 dated 31 December 2014.
17 Law No. 18 of 2003 on Advocates.
18 Indonesian Advocate Code of Ethics, ratified on 23 May 2002.
19 Article 1 Paragraph 8 of Government Regulation No. 43 of 2015 on Reporting Party in the Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering provides that suspicious financial transaction is (1) a financial transaction that deviates from the profile, characteristic or behaviour of transaction pattern of the service user; (2) a financial transaction conducted by the service user that is reasonably considered as having the purpose of avoiding the reporting obligation of the service user under the laws and regulations pertaining to the prevention and eradication of money laundering; (3) a financial transaction that is conducted by or being cancelled to be carried out by using assets that allegedly originated from proceeds of crime; and (4) a financial transaction that is requested by the PPATK to be reported by the advocate because the transaction involves assets that allegedly originated from proceeds of crime.
20 Article 1 Paragraph 3 of PPATK Regulation No. 10 of 2017 on the Application of the Principle of Know Your Service User for Advocates provides that the principle of know your service user is the principle applied by advocates to know the profile and transaction of its service user by implementing certain obligations under the Regulation.
21 Law No. 23 of 2006 on Population Administration, as amended; Law No. 14 of 2008 on Public Information Disclosure.
22 Article 1886 of the Indonesian Civil Code; Article 300 of Civil Procedure Law for Regions Outside Java and Madura.
23 Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2016 on Procedure of Court-Annexed Mediation.