Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Legal Negotiation Skills Training for Dispute Resolution Montayana Meher; Agata Kurniati; Rosmalinda Rosmalinda
Abdimas Indonesian Journal Vol. 6 No. 2 (2026)
Publisher : Civiliza Publishing

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59525/aij.1841

Abstract

Dispute resolution through non-litigation mechanisms has increasingly developed as an alternative approach that is faster, more efficient, and oriented toward achieving mutual agreement between the parties. However, legal negotiation skills remain a competency that is not yet optimally mastered by law students, as the learning process tends to emphasize theoretical aspects rather than practical application. This community service program aims to enhance students’ knowledge and skills in applying legal negotiation techniques as one of the methods of out-of-court dispute resolution. The implementation method includes participant needs identification, material delivery, interactive discussions, case-based negotiation simulations, and evaluation through pre-test and post-test assessments. The participants consisted of 50 Faculty of Law students who actively participated in the training activities. The results show an improvement in participants’ understanding of the concept of legal negotiation, negotiation stages, persuasive communication techniques, negotiation strategy development, and interest-based dispute resolution (interest-based negotiation). The case simulations also enhanced participants’ ability to identify the legal positions of the parties, build effective communication, and produce mutually beneficial agreements. This program contributes to strengthening students’ practical competencies in dealing with dispute resolution dynamics in professional practice
Law Evasion through Choice of Law Clauses in International Business Contracts: An Indonesian Study Montayana Meher; Agata Kurniati
Kosmik Hukum Vol. 26 No. 2 (2026)
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30595/kosmikhukum.v26i2.28324

Abstract

This article examines the problem of law evasion through choice-of-law and forum-selection clauses in international business contracts in Indonesia, focusing on how the absence of a codified private international law (PIL) framework generates inconsistent judicial responses. The central research problem concerns the uncertainty surrounding the limits of party autonomy vis-à-vis mandatory rules and public policy, particularly in cross-border transactions intensified by regional economic integration and global supply chains. Using doctrinal analysis, the study synthesizes four leading cases: Nine AM Ltd v. PT BKPL, Asuransi Harta Aman Pratama Tbk v. PT Pelayaran Manalagi, PT Rainbow Indah Karpet v. PT TNT Skypak, and Alexander William Ford v. Man Lee Ford Cheung. This study finds that courts tend to enforce foreign governing-law and forum clauses in highly internationalized and standardized sectors such as marine insurance and logistics, while prioritizing mandatory rules and public policy, most notably the Indonesian-language requirement under Law No. 24 of 2009, when disputes implicate domestically sensitive interests. This selective approach produces vertical and horizontal inconsistencies across court levels and panels, undermining legal certainty, encouraging forum shopping, and creating risks of both under- and over-enforcement of protective norms. To narrow the scope for law evasion while aligning Indonesia with comparative private international law standards and regional commercial expectations, this article recommends: (1) codifying party autonomy as the default governing principle for international commercial contracts; (2) adopting a proportionality-based test to assess the application of overriding mandatory rules and public policy exceptions; (3) clarifying the normative scope, legal consequences, and available remedies under Law No. 24 of 2009 in the context of private contracts; and (4) developing judicial guidance to ensure a consistent assessment of foreign nexus, sectoral sensitivity, and the protection of weaker parties.