Penerapan Asas Ketertiban Umum terhadap Putusan Arbitrase Asing di Indonesia

Abstract

Penelitian ini ingin menjawab interpretasi dan pelaksanaan asas ketertiban umum terhadap putusan arbitrase asing di pengadilan Indonesia. Dengan berbasis pada penelitian hukum, penelitian diharapkan akan menjawab pengakuan dan pelaksanaan keputusan arbritase asing tersebut. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pengecualian terhadap ketertiban umum ditemukan dalam Pasal V Paragraph 2 angka (b) Konvensi New York 1958 tentang Pengakuan dan Pelaksanaan Keputusan Arbitrase Asing. Konvensi menentukan bahwa pengakuan dan pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase dapat ditolak apabila kemudian ditemukan pengakuan dan pelaksanaan putusan tersebut melanggar ketentuan ketertiban umum di negara yang bersangkutan. Namun demikian, Konvensi tidak memberikan pengertian secara jelas tentang ketertiban umum, hal ini diserahkan kepada masing-masing negara peserta konvensi. Berdasarkan putusan pengadilan, konsep ketertiban umum yang diterapkan di Indonesia diinterpretasi secara luas dan domestik. The Implementation of Public Order Principle on Foreign Arbitral Awards in Indonesia This study aims to answer the interpretation and implementation of public order principle on foreign arbitral awards in Indonesian courts. Based on legal research, it is expected to answer the recognition and implementation of foreign arbitral awards. The results show that the exception to public order is found in Article V Paragraph 2 Number (b) of the 1958 New York Convention concerning the Recognition and Implementation of Foreign Arbitral Awards. The Convention stipulates that the recognition and implementation of an arbitral award can be rejected if later found that the recognition and implementation of the award violates the provisions of public order in the concerned country. However, the Convention does not provide a clear conception of public order, this is submitted to the respective countries participating in the convention. Based on a court decisions, the concept of public order applied in Indonesia was interpreted widely and domestically.

The Urgency of the Principle of Public Policy as a Basis for Refusing the Execution of Commercial Arbitration Awards Submitted for Execution in Indonesia

“…The New York Convention in the case of the notion of public policy leaves the interpretation to each member state of the convention through judicial institutions that have the authority to handle the issue in question. In line with this statement, according to Lena Farsia (2018), the submission of public policy issues to each country is suspected that each country certainly has different characteristics from one another and each country is a sovereign legal subject and is not Commercial Arbitration Awards Submitted for Execution in Indonesia subject to the authority of any country. In the 1958 New York Convention, Article 5 paragraph (2) states the refusal to execute a judgment when it is contrary to public policy.…”

“…Such discretion, often especially in civil law countries, uses this principle as a "sword" rather than a "shield" against international arbitral awards. Indeed, if the interpretation of public policy is intended only for the protection of national political interests, it will undermine the values contained in the New York Convention (Farsia & Taufik, 2018, Pujiyono, et al, 2022.…”

“…Case of Dongfeng Garments Factory of Kai Feng City and Taichun International Trade (HK) Co. Ltd. case, with Henan Garments Import & Export (Group) Co. (1992), where the Chinese court refused the execution of a judgment that obliged the local party to pay a certain amount of compensation with the consideration that it could have a negative impact on the Chinese economy (Farsia & Taufik, 2018).…”

Ketidakpastian Hukum Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Bisnis Internasional Melalui Arbitrase Internasional Di Indonesia

“…Adapun menurut ketentuan perundang-undangan nasional diatur dalam Pasal 66 UU AAPS. Tidak semua putusan arbitrase asing memperoleh exequatur di Indonesia (Farsia & Taufik, 2018) (Basarah, 2010). Menurut ketentuan UU Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 bahwa salah satu syarat pengakuan dan pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase internasional di Indonesia adalah putusan arbitrase tersebut tidak bertentangan dengan ketertiban umum (public order atau public policy).…”

“…Terkait pelanggaran ketertiban umum, Mahkamah Agung memberikan definisi terhadap ketertiban umum dalam Pasal 4 ayat (2) Perma Nomor 1 Tahun 1999. Pada pokoknya ketertiban umum adalah sendi sendi asasi dari lex fori (Farsia & Taufik, 2018) (Basarah, 2010) (Rajagukguk, 2008). Artinya, ketika putusan arbitrase asing ditolak oleh PN Jakarta Pusat atau Mahkamah Agung karena bertentangan dengan ketertiban umum, dengan kata lain putusan tersebut bertentangan dengan sendisendi asasi hukum sang hakim atau peraturan perundang-undangan di Indonesia.…”