International Arbitration Comparative Guide

1 Legal framework

1.1 What is the relevant legislation on arbitration in your jurisdiction? Are there any significant limitations on the scope of the statutory regime – for example, does it govern oral arbitration agreements?

The main legislation on arbitration in Indonesia is Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution ("1999 Arbitration Act"). Additionally, certain arbitration-related court procedures are further regulated by Supreme Court Regulation No. 3 of 2023 on Procedure for the Appointment of Arbitrators by the Court, Challenge of Arbitrators, Examination on Application for Enforcement and Annulment of Arbitral Awards ("Supreme Court Regulation No. 3/2023"). Specifically on the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, the Supreme Court also issued Regulation No. 1 of 1990 which has not been expressly revoked. While the 1990 regulation formally still applies, its provisions in effect have been supplanted by both the 1999 Arbitration Act and Supreme Court Regulation No. 3/2023.

There are no significant limitations on the scope of the 1999 Arbitration Act.

1.2 Does this legislation differentiate between domestic arbitration and international arbitration? If so, how is each defined?

The 1999 Arbitration Act does not differentiate between domestic arbitration and international arbitration, in the sense that the legislation applies to both domestic (non-international) and international arbitration (arbitration seated in Indonesia but with cross-border elements). Therefore, the 1999 Arbitration Act applies and governs both kinds of arbitration. In other words, the legislative approach in Indonesia does not separate the legislation for domestic arbitration and international arbitration.

However, the 1999 Arbitration Act makes a distinction between the status of an 'international arbitral award' and 'national arbitral award'. Article 1(9) of the Act defines an 'international arbitral award' as an arbitral award rendered outside the territory of Indonesia or recognized under Indonesian law as such. In this regard, the term 'international arbitral award' in the 1999 Arbitration Act is actually akin to the term 'foreign arbitral award' as used in the 1958 New York Convention or in the context of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration ("UNCITRAL Model Law"). Conversely, 'national arbitral award' means an arbitral award rendered in the territory of Indonesia. This distinction between 'national' and 'international' arbitral awards mainly affects the terms and procedures for recognition and enforcement of the respective award.

1.3 Is the arbitration legislation in your jurisdiction based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration?

No, the 1999 Arbitration Act is not based on the UNCITRAL Model Law.

1.4 Are all provisions of the legislation in your jurisdiction mandatory?

No, not all provisions of the 1999 Arbitration Act are mandatory. For example, mandatory provisions concern arbitrability, validity of arbitration agreements, enforcement and annulment of arbitral awards. On the other hand, other provisions are optional and allow the parties to agree on alternative arrangements, such as on the procedures for the appointment of arbitrators, language of arbitration, applicable arbitration rules and procedures and place of arbitration.

1.5 Are there any current plans to amend the arbitration legislation in your jurisdiction?

The government has included the 1999 Arbitration Act as one of the legislations which will be amended based on the 2025 Indonesian National Legislation Program (or Prolegnas in Indonesian parlance). Nevertheless, until now there is neither any publicly available draft or bill available for the public nor any public consultation on the amendment. It is still very much questionable whether any amendment will materialise in the next 1 (one) to 2 (two) years.

1.6 Is your jurisdiction a signatory to the New York Convention? If so, have any reservations been made?

Yes, Indonesia is a party to the 1958 New York Convention.

In this regard, Indonesia has made the 'reciprocity reservation' and 'commercial reservation' pursuant to Article 1(3) of the 1958 New York Convention, such that Indonesia will only apply the convention if the arbitral award in question is made in the territory of another state party and pertain only to legal disputes considered as commercial under Indonesian law.

1.7 Is your jurisdiction a signatory to any other treaties relevant to arbitration?

Yes, Indonesia is also a party to the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States 1965 (the ICSID Convention).

In this regard, many Indonesian investment treaties refer to International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes arbitration although some other investment treaties may refer to other arbitration rules as well.

2 Arbitrability and restrictions on arbitration

2.1 How is it determined whether a dispute is arbitrable in your jurisdiction?

Arbitrability is determined under Article 5 of the 1999 Arbitration Act. There are essentially two requirements for a dispute to be arbitrable. First, the dispute must be a commercial dispute (in a wide sense, i.e. not merely trade or sale and purchase). Second, the dispute must be one where the parties hold control over possible procedure and settlement (i.e. not one where the law requires or mandate any particular procedure for adjudication or settlement).

Of particular note, commercial tort claims are arbitrable in Indonesia as long as the parties have given their consent to arbitrate such claims, usually by agreeing on a broad wording in the arbitration clause of a given contract to also cover any and all disputes connected to the contract.

2.2 Are there any restrictions on the choice of seat of arbitration for certain disputes?

No, the 1999 Arbitration Act does not contain any restriction on the choice of seat of arbitration for certain disputes.

3 Arbitration agreement

3.1 What are the validity requirements for an arbitration agreement in your jurisdiction?

All agreements, including arbitration agreements, are valid under Indonesian law if they fulfil the requirements under Article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code ("ICC"), namely (i) consent of parties, (ii) capacity of parties, (iii) a specific subject matter, and (iv) lawful cause.

Specifically on arbitration agreement, Article 4 of the 1999 Arbitration Act provides that arbitration agreements (whether made before or after the dispute arises) must be made in writing. They may be made in a signed document, through an exchange of letters or other means of communication.

For arbitration agreements made after the dispute in question arises, Article 9 of the 1999 Arbitration Act stipulates that such agreements must be made in writing, signed by both parties, and include the following:

• subject matter of the dispute;
• full names and addresses of both parties;
• full names and addresses of the arbitrator or arbitral tribunal;
• place where the arbitrator or arbitral tribunal will render the award;
• full name of the tribunal secretary;
• dispute settlement period;
• statement of willingness from the arbitrator(s); and
• statement of willingness from the disputing parties to bear the expenses necessary to settle the dispute through arbitration.

If the parties cannot make a signed agreement containing the above, Article 9(2) of the 1999 Arbitration Act allows them to encapsulate the agreement in the form of a notarial deed. Admittedly this provision can create some confusion, therefore it is advisable for the parties to formalize any post-dispute arbitration agreement in the form of a notarial deed in any case.

3.2 Are there any provisions of legislation or any other legal sources in your jurisdiction concerning the separability of arbitration agreements?

Yes, Article 10 of the 1999 Arbitration Act recognises the separability of arbitration agreements, such that an arbitration clause is distinct and separable from the underlying contract in which it is contained. In other words, the validity of the arbitration clause is not dependent on the validity of the main contract. Specifically, Article 10(h) of the 1999 Arbitration Act provides that an arbitration agreement is not rendered null and void in the case of expiration or invalidity of the underlying contract.

Aside from expiration and invalidity of the underlying contract, Article 10 of the 1999 Arbitration Act also enumerates several specific circumstances that do not render an arbitration agreement null and void, namely:

• death of a party;
• bankruptcy of a party;
• novation;
• insolvency of a party;
• inheritance or succession;
• termination of the underlying contract pursuant to its own terms; or
• where the performance of the agreement is assigned to a third party with the approval from the parties of the arbitration agreement.

3.3 Are there provisions on the seat and/or language of the arbitration if there is no agreement between the parties?

Yes, the 1999 Arbitration Act contains provisions on both the seat and language of arbitration in the absence of any agreement between the parties.

On the seat of arbitration, this shall be determined by the arbitral tribunal in the absence of the parties' agreement as stipulated in Article 31(3) of the 1999 Arbitration Act.

On the language of arbitration, Article 28 of the 1999 Arbitration Act expressly provides that the language of the arbitration shall be Indonesian language (Bahasa Indonesia), unless otherwise agreed by the parties. Therefore, it is important to expressly state the language of arbitration in the arbitration agreement if the parties have at that point intended for a foreign (non-Indonesian) language to be the language of arbitration.

4 Objections to jurisdiction

4.1 When must a party raise an objection to the jurisdiction of the tribunal and how can this objection be raised?

The 1999 Arbitration Act does not contain specific provisions governing objections to the arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction. If an analogy is drawn from the Indonesian Civil Procedural Law, jurisdictional objections may be raised at any time before the final decision is rendered. However, in practice jurisdictional objections are typically raised no later than in the statement of defence to avoid risking the tribunal deeming the objection untimely and inadmissible.

4.2 Can a tribunal rule on its own jurisdiction?

Yes, a tribunal can rule on its own jurisdiction. While the 1999 Arbitration Act does not expressly recognize the principle of kompetenz-kompetenz, recent court jurisprudences show that Indonesian courts demonstrate a position that aligns with this principle although the courts do not directly reference it by name.

This is further supported by the fact that the 1999 Arbitration Act recognises the principle of separability, which is often considered to work together with kompetenz-kompetenz.

4.3 Can a party apply to the courts of the seat for a ruling on the jurisdiction of the tribunal? In what circumstances?

No, a party cannot request a ruling on the arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction from Indonesian courts. Articles 3 and 11 of the 1999 Arbitration Act clearly stipulate that Indonesian courts lack jurisdiction to hear a dispute when the parties have agreed to resolve them through arbitration.

5 The parties

5.1 Are there any restrictions on who can be a party to an arbitration agreement?

No, the 1999 Arbitration Act does not restrict who can be a party to an arbitration agreement. Any individual or legal entity, whether private or government entity, may enter into an arbitration agreement.

5.2 Are the parties under any duties in relation to the arbitration?

There are no specific duties by the parties in relation to the arbitration under the 1999 Arbitration Act. With regards to the duty of confidentiality, the 1999 Arbitration Act in fact does not contain such obligation. However, in practice, most institutional rules in Indonesia impose a general duty of confidentiality (e.g. the Indonesian National Arbitration Board or "BANI" and the Financial Services Sector Alternative Dispute Resolution Body or "LAPS SJK").

5.3 Are there any provisions of law which deal with multi-party disputes?

The 1999 Arbitration Act does not contain any provision which deals with multi-party disputes, other than Article 30 of the Act which provides that a third party may be joined to an ongoing arbitration proceeding if the following requirements are fulfilled:

• the third party has an interest in the arbitration proceeding;
• the joinder is approved by the existing parties; and
• the joinder is approved by the arbitral tribunal.

Aside from the above, the 1999 Arbitration Act does not contain any provision dealing with the impact of multi-party arbitration on various aspects of the proceedings (e.g. the appointment of arbitrators, consolidation, administration of proceedings and payment of advance fees and costs). However, major Indonesian arbitral institutions, such as BANI and LAPS SJK contain provisions dealing with consolidation and appointment of arbitrator(s) in multi-party disputes.

6 Applicable law issues

6.1 How is the law of the arbitration agreement determined in your jurisdiction?

The 1999 Arbitration Act does not contain any provision to determine the law governing the arbitration agreement specifically, and there is no widely known court decision in this regard.

In view of the principle of party autonomy, Indonesian law will likely recognise an express choice of law governing the arbitration agreement. If there is no express choice, it is still an open question whether the tribunal or Indonesian courts will apply either the law of the contract or the law of the seat to govern the arbitration agreement.

6.2 Will the tribunal uphold a party agreement as to the substantive law of the dispute? Where the substantive law is unclear, how will the tribunal determine what it should be?

Yes, the tribunal will uphold a party agreement as to the substantive law of the dispute. This is expressly recognised under Article 56(2) of the 1999 Arbitration Act.

Where the substantive law is unclear, the Elucidation of Article 56(2) of the 1999 Arbitration Act provides that the law to be applied is the law of the seat (i.e. Indonesian law). However, one issue is whether this still allows for the application of Indonesian private international law, such that the application of Indonesian law here may still result in reference to a foreign law that the tribunal consider to be the more proper applicable law.

7 Consolidation and third parties

7.1 Does the law in your jurisdiction permit consolidation of separate arbitrations into a single arbitration proceeding? Are there any conditions which apply to consolidation?

The 1999 Arbitration Act does not expressly regulate consolidation of proceedings. In that regard, consolidation can be done if it is provided under the applicable arbitration rules. This is further supported by Article 34 of the 1999 Arbitration Act which reaffirms the application of the specific arbitration rules agreed by the parties.

The conditions which apply to consolidation thus follows the provision of the pertinent arbitration rules. For instance, Article 9 of BANI Arbitration Rules and Procedures 2022 ("BANI Rules") allows consolidation of proceedings requested by a party when one of the following conditions are met:

• the parties agree to the consolidation, and the multiple arbitral proceedings arise from the same legal relationship;
• the filed claims are all based on multiple agreements involving the same parties, and the chosen dispute resolution mechanism is BANI; or
• the filed claims are based on multiple agreements where one of the parties is the same, and the chosen dispute resolution mechanism is BANI.

7.2 Does the law in your jurisdiction permit the joinder of additional parties to an arbitration which has already commenced?

Yes, Article 30 of the 1999 Arbitration Act allows the joinder of additional parties to an arbitration, with the following requirements:

• the third party has an interest in the arbitration proceeding;
• the joinder is approved by the existing parties; and
• the joinder is approved by the tribunal.

7.3 Does an arbitration agreement bind assignees or other third parties?

No, an arbitration agreement does not bind assignees or other third parties under Indonesian law. In particular, Article 4 of the 1999 Arbitration Act requires the arbitration agreement to be in writing – hence excluding assignees or other third parties from the application of the arbitration agreement.

However, there are particular situations whereby an arbitration clause in a contract will still survive and apply, among others in case of novation. This also does not exclude the case of the arbitration agreement possibly applying to a third party by operation of law, such as in the case of cessie – although there is no widely-known precedent where Indonesian courts have ruled on this issue specifically.

8 The tribunal

8.1 How is the tribunal appointed?

The appointment of the tribunal is firstly done based on the parties' arbitration agreement or, in the absence of any specific provision in the arbitration agreement, based on the arbitration rules chosen by the parties.

Otherwise, in the context of the 1999 Arbitration Act, the appointment of the tribunal depends on the number of the arbitrators. When the tribunal comprises three arbitrators, Article 15 of the 1999 Arbitration Act provides that each party is to appoint one arbitrator, and the two party-appointed arbitrators subsequently choose the presiding arbitrator. In the event that the no agreement can be reached on the presiding arbitrator, the president of the district court where the respondent is domiciled ("District Court President") may make the appointment. Interestingly, in this vein the arbitrator appointed by the claimant shall serve as a sole arbitrator if the respondent fails to appoint an arbitrator within 30 (thirty) days of receiving the notice of arbitration.

When the tribunal comprises a sole arbitrator, Article 14 of the 1999 Arbitration Act provides that the appointment is based on the parties' agreement. Claimant is to first propose the name of the arbitrator to the respondent. If there has been no agreement within 14 (fourteen) days, the District Court President may appoint an arbitrator upon the request of either party.

As can be surmised from the above, in general the District Court President serves as the appointing authority under the 1999 Arbitration Act.

8.2 Are there any requirements as to the number or qualification of arbitrators in your jurisdiction?

The 1999 Arbitration Act does not restrict any number of arbitrators. However, the standard practice is to have an odd number (1 (one) or 3 (three) arbitrators).

With regards to the qualification of arbitrators, Article 12(1) of the 1999 Arbitration Act provides that an arbitrator must (i) have legal capacity, (ii) be at least 35 (thirty five) years old, (iii) have no family relationship by blood or marriage with either party up to the second degree, (iv) have no financial or other interest in the arbitral award, and (v) possess a minimum of 15 (fifteen) years of experience in their respective field. Additionally, Article 12(2) of the 1999 Arbitration Act precludes judges, state prosecutors, court clerks and other court officials from any appointment as arbitrators.

8.3 Can an arbitrator be challenged in your jurisdiction? If so, on what basis? Are there any restrictions on the challenge of an arbitrator?

Yes, an arbitrator can be challenged in Indonesia. Articles 22(1) and 22(2) of the 1999 Arbitration Act provides that the challenge can be brought on the basis of sufficient evidence giving rise to doubts as to the arbitrator's impartiality and independence. In particular, the challenge can be based on proof that there exists any family, financial or work-related relationship between the arbitrator and a party in arbitration or its representatives.

Article 24(4) of the 1999 Arbitration Act provides that the challenge must be brought in writing within 14 (fourteen) days since the ground for the challenge is known or discovered by the challenging party.

8.4 If a challenge is successful, how is the arbitrator replaced?

In principle, the substitute arbitrator shall be appointed following the same procedures used for appointing the replaced arbitrator as provided under Article 25 of the 1999 Arbitration Act.

8.5 What duties are imposed on arbitrators? Are these all imposed by legislation?

The 1999 Arbitration Act does not expressly provide for any general 'duty' or 'duties' imposed on arbitrators. However, Article 18(1) of the 1999 Arbitration Act requires arbitrators to disclose any fact that may give rise to any concern regarding the arbitrator's impartiality or independence.

8.6 What powers does an arbitrator have in relation to: (a) procedure, including evidence; (b) interim relief; (c) parties which do not comply with its orders; (d) issuing partial final awards; (e) the remedies it can grant in a final award and (f) interest?

(a) Procedure, including evidence?

Under the 1999 Arbitration Act, the powers of an arbitrator in relation to procedure are the following:

• If there is no agreement by the party, determine the use of any language other than the Indonesian language throughout the arbitration proceedings (Article 28);
• Subject to the parties' agreement, allow the joinder of a third-party if the third party is deemed to have a related interest to the case at hand (Article 30);
• Requires the parties to provide an Indonesian language translation of all documents or evidence (Article 35);
• Order the parties to submit necessary additional documents or evidence (Article 46(3)); and
• Request witnesses or experts to be presented (Article 49(1)).

(b) Interim relief?

The arbitral tribunal has the power to grant interim relief under Article 32(1) of the 1999 Arbitration Act, which includes ordering the conservatory attachment of assets, the consignment of goods or the sale of perishable goods. Interim relief in the form of conservatory attachment can now be enforced by the court pursuant to Article 29 of Supreme Court Regulation No. 3/2023.

(c) Parties which do not comply with its orders?

The 1999 Arbitration Act does not expressly govern the tribunal's power to take measures in response to any party's non-compliance with the tribunal's orders. In general, the tribunal have the discretion to take the non-compliance into account in the award's reasoning as the tribunal deems appropriate.

(d) Issuing partial final awards?

The 1999 Arbitration Act is silent on the issue of partial final awards, in which case partial awards can be issued in practice. On the other hand, domestic institutional rules such as BANI Rules provides for the issuance of partial awards.

However, caution must be taken because there has been a precedent where the Central Jakarta District Court and the Supreme Court in 2010 refused to enforce a partial award rendered in a Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) arbitration (in the dispute between Astro and Lippo groups) because the court erroneously deemed that a partial award is not final. So far there has been no widely known precedent to the contrary, although it is important to also note that Indonesia does not recognise stare decisis and court precedent is not binding.

(e) The remedies it can grant in a final award?

The 1999 Arbitration Act is silent on the issue of remedies. Under the ICC, Indonesian law generally recognizes the principle of 'restitutio ad integrum' where the remedies are such to restore the condition as if the breach of contract or law was not committed.

In that regard, the tribunal may grant several forms of remedies in its final award:

• Compensation which may consist of costs, losses, and interest (Article 1267 of the ICC). This also includes foreseeable expected revenues;
• Ordering the losing party to perform specific obligation; and
• Making declaratory remedy (e.g. on the termination of a contract or declaring the breach of contract).

(f) Interest?

The 1999 Arbitration Act is silent on the issue of interest. In general, the tribunal may refer to the parties' agreement on the imposition of any particular interest. In the absence of such agreement, the tribunal may have resort to Articles 1243 and 1267 of the ICC as the basis to impose an annual interest of 6% (six percent).

8.7 How may a tribunal seated in your jurisdiction proceed if a party does not participate in the arbitration?

This depends on which party does not participate in the arbitration.

If it is the claimant, the claim will be dismissed, and the tribunal's mandate will end as provided under Article 43 of the 1999 Arbitration Act.

On the other hand, if it is the respondent, the arbitral tribunal will continue the proceedings and may grant the claims, unless they are found to be baseless or contrary to the applicable law.

8.8 Are arbitrators immune from liability?

Yes, with certain exception, as Article 21 of the 1999 Arbitration Act provides that arbitrators are protected from liability unless it can be proven that they acted in bad faith during the arbitral proceedings.

9 The role of the court during an arbitration

9.1 Will the court in your jurisdiction stay proceedings and refer parties to arbitration if there is an arbitration agreement?

Yes, Indonesian courts will stay proceedings and refer parties to arbitration if there is an arbitration agreement, in the sense that the courts will stop proceedings because the claim is inadmissible. It should be noted, however, that Indonesian courts generally does not suspend proceedings – hence in this regard the courts simply hold that the claim is inadmissible because of the arbitration agreement.

9.2 Does the court in your jurisdiction have any powers in relation to an arbitration seated in your jurisdiction and/or seated outside your jurisdiction? What are these powers? Under what conditions are these powers exercised?

Yes, Indonesian courts have certain powers in relation to arbitrations seated in Indonesia, namely to:

• appoint an arbitrator or an arbitral tribunal if the parties fail to agree on the mechanism of appointment (Articles 13 to 15 of the 1999 Arbitration Act, Article 4 of the Supreme Court Regulation No. 3/2023);
• decide on challenges brought against arbitrators appointed by the court (Article 23(1) of the 1999 Arbitration Act, Article 4 of the Supreme Court Regulation No. 3/2023);
• set aside domestic arbitral awards (Articles 70-72 of the 1999 Arbitration Act);
• register and enforce domestic arbitral awards (Articles 59, 61-62 of the 1999 Arbitration Act, Articles 8-9 of the Supreme Court Regulation No. 3/2023); and
• register and enforce any conservatory attachment of assets made by an arbitral tribunal (Article 29 of the Supreme Court Regulation No. 3/2023).

In relation to arbitrations seated outside of Indonesia (i.e. international arbitration), Indonesian courts do not have any power, save for the registration and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.

9.3 Can the parties exclude the court's powers by agreement?

The parties can exclude the court's powers to appoint an arbitrator or arbitral tribunal, or to decide on the challenge against an arbitrator, by agreeing on a different procedure in the arbitration agreement or by choosing an arbitration rule which has specifically govern the relevant procedure.

However, the parties cannot exclude the court's powers concerning the registration and enforcement of arbitral awards or to set aside domestic arbitral awards because the provisions in the 1999 Arbitration Act providing for these powers are mandatory law.

10 Costs

10.1 How will the tribunal approach the issue of costs?

The tribunal will generally approach the issue of costs following the principle that 'costs follow the event', as provided under Articles 76 and 77 of the 1999 Arbitration Act, so that the unsuccessful party in an arbitral proceeding must pay the costs of the arbitration. However, as with international practice, the tribunal remains free to adjust the allocation of costs if it considers the circumstances appropriate.

The costs of the arbitration, as defined in Article 76(2) of the 1999 Arbitration Act, include (i) arbitrators' fees, (ii) travel and other expenses incurred by the arbitrators, (iii) costs for factual and expert witnesses, and (iv) administrative fees.

However, in practice, costs for factual and expert witnesses submitted or presented by the parties are excluded. This also relates to a common position taken in Indonesian court jurisprudence that the parties' legal costs are not claimable. Therefore, it should be noted that if legal costs are awarded in an arbitration seated in Indonesia, the award may face the risk of the losing party mounting a challenge to have the award set aside or refused enforcement in Indonesia.

Nevertheless, the tribunal's approach on the issue of costs will ultimately be guided by the parties' agreement and the specific arbitration rules they have chosen, if any.

10.2 Are there any restrictions on what the parties can agree in terms of costs in an arbitration seated in your jurisdiction?

There is no restriction on what the parties can agree in terms of costs in an arbitration seated in Indonesia.

11 Funding

11.1 Is third-party funding permitted for arbitrations seated in your jurisdiction?

Third-party funding is neither expressly permitted nor prohibited in Indonesia. Domestic institutional rules also have not addressed the issue of third-party funding. In practice, there is also no widely known example or instance of third-party funding in arbitration seated in Indonesia, leaving the issue unclear.

12 Award

12.1 What procedural and substantive requirements must be met by an award?

Pursuant to Article 54 of the 1999 Arbitration Act, an award must contain the following:

• heading of the decision stating "DEMI KEADILAN BERDASARKAN KETUHANAN YANG MAHA ESA" (in English, "In the name of justice based on the Almighty God");
• full name and address of the arbitrator;
• full name and address of the parties;
• description of the dispute;
• positions of the parties;
• considerations or reasonings and conclusions of the tribunal;
• opinion of each arbitrator if there is a dissenting opinion;
• operative part of the dispositif;
• place and date of the award; and
• signature of the arbitrators.

In the absence of any arbitrator's signature due to illness or death, such circumstance must be noted in the decision so that it will not invalidate the award.

Furthermore, an award must comply with the timeframe requirement (as explained in the next point).

12.2 Must the award be produced within a certain timeframe?

Yes, the award must be rendered within 30 (thirty) days after the close of the arbitration proceedings pursuant to Article 57 of the 1999 Arbitration Act. On a related note, the 1999 Arbitration Act also provides that the tribunal must close the proceedings within 180 (one hundred eighty) days since the constitution of the tribunal (see Article 48 of the Act).

However, such a timeframe is subject to extension as agreed by the parties or the applicable timeframe may instead fall to be governed under the arbitration rules chosen by the parties.

13 Enforcement of awards

13.1 Are awards enforced in your jurisdiction? Under what procedure?

Yes, awards are enforced in Indonesia through the following procedures: (i) registration of the award at the court, (ii) decree of enforcement (exequatur) by the court, and (iii) executorial attachment of the award debtor's assets. The 1999 Arbitration Act governs these procedures in Articles 59-69 and further elaborated by various provisions in Supreme Court Regulation No. 3/2023.

Regarding (i) registration of the award: the registration is done by the arbitral institution (in institutional arbitration) or the tribunal (in ad hoc arbitration) – or by their respective representative based on a power of attorney – within 30 (thirty) days after the award is rendered at the district court where the respondent in arbitration is domiciled ("District Court"). Failure to register renders the award unenforceable.

For foreign awards, the registration is done at the Central Jakarta District Court and there is no time limit (in other words, foreign awards can be registered at the Central Jakarta District Court at any time). The registration requires a certificate or statement from the Indonesian embassy or diplomatic representative at the seat of arbitration, affirming that the country of the award creditor is a party of the 1958 New York Convention together with Indonesia.

Regarding (ii) decree of enforcement (exequatur): upon registration of the award, the award creditor may apply for the District Court to issue a decree of enforcement (exequatur). The decree of enforcement will be issued if the award satisfies the requirement of arbitrability, validity of the underlying agreement, and not contrary to public policy.

For foreign awards, the application for enforcement is also subject to reciprocity where the seat of the award is a State party to the 1958 New York Convention (hence the requirement for an embassy or diplomatic representative statement above). In this regard, the grounds for refusal to enforce under Article V of the 1958 New York Convention may also apply and become the court's consideration in assessing the enforcement application. As with award registration above, enforcement of foreign awards is done at the Central Jakarta District Court.

If the court decides to enforce the award and issues the decree of enforcement, there is no legal recourse available to challenge the decree. However, if the court decides to refuse enforcement (non-exequatur), the party applying for enforcement may file a cassation directly to the Supreme Court to make a final determination on enforcement.

Regarding (iii) executorial attachment of the award debtor's assets: if the court decides to enforce the award and issues the decree of enforcement, the award is enforced in the form of executorial attachment following the same procedure as an ordinary court judgment.

14 Grounds for challenging an award

14.1 What are the grounds on which an award can be challenged, appealed or otherwise set aside in your jurisdiction?

An award cannot be appealed in Indonesia. Nevertheless, a domestic award can be set aside on the grounds provided in Article 70 of the 1999 Arbitration Act, namely:

• There is a letter or document submitted as evidence in the arbitral proceedings which, after the award is rendered, is acknowledged or held to be fraudulent;
• After the award is rendered, a decisive document is discovered that had not been disclosed by the opposing party in the arbitral proceedings; or
• The award is based on deception or fraud committed by one of the parties in the arbitral proceedings.

Prior to the enactment of Supreme Court Regulation No. 3/2023, Indonesian court jurisprudence was split on whether the three grounds to set aside an award under Article 70 of the 1999 Arbitration Act above are exhaustive. For instance, several court decisions set aside domestic arbitral awards based on grounds similar to those in Article V of the 1958 New York Convention regarding refusal of enforcement. However, recent court decisions rendered after the enactment of Supreme Court Regulation No. 3/2023 have uniformly held that the three grounds provided in Article 70 of the 1999 Arbitration Act are exhaustive and they are the only grounds to set aside a domestic arbitral award.

Indonesian court jurisprudence has also consistently held that foreign arbitral awards cannot be set aside in Indonesia.

14.2 Are there are any time limits and/or other requirements to bring a challenge?

Yes. An application to set aside an award must be made within 30 (thirty) days after the registration of the award to the relevant district court (namely, the district court at the domicile of the respondent in arbitration) pursuant to Article 71 of the 1999 Arbitration Act.

14.3 Are parties permitted to exclude any rights of challenge or appeal?

No, the parties are not permitted to exclude or waive the rights to challenge or set aside an arbitral award because the provisions governing this legal recourse are mandatory law.

15 Confidentiality

15.1 Is arbitration seated in your jurisdiction confidential? Is a duty of confidentiality found in the arbitration legislation?

Yes, arbitral proceedings in Indonesia are confidential as provided under Article 27 of the 1999 Arbitration Act. In terms of duty of confidentiality, see point 5.2 above.

15.2 Are there any exceptions to confidentiality?

The 1999 Arbitration Act does not provide any exceptions to confidentiality.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.