<![CDATA[The expansion of digital commerce has transformed contractual relationships by replacing conventional negotiation and consent with standardized interfaces, automated transactions, and platform-mediated contracting. These developments challenge the traditional application of good faith, particularly in addressing information asymmetry, opaque contractual terms, automated decision-making, and unequal bargaining power. This study aims to reconceptualize the doctrine of good faith in digital contracting through a comparative legal analysis of Indonesia and Japan and to identify regulatory principles capable of strengthening contractual fairness without undermining legal certainty. The study employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. It examines contract law, electronic transaction regulation, consumer protection frameworks, and relevant legal doctrines in both jurisdictions through qualitative and systematic legal analysis. The findings reveal that Indonesia and Japan share a normative commitment to good faith but differ in its doctrinal articulation and regulatory implementation in digital transactions. Indonesia retains a relatively fragmented framework in which good faith, electronic transactions, and consumer protection operate across separate regulatory regimes, whereas the Japanese approach provides useful comparative insights into integrating good faith with consumer protection, transparency, and control of unfair contractual terms. The study argues that good faith in digital contracting should extend beyond contractual performance to encompass pre-contractual disclosure, meaningful digital consent, transparency of standard terms, platform accountability, and substantive fairness. It concludes that Indonesia requires a contextual reconstruction of good faith informed by comparative Japanese experience while remaining consistent with the distinctive foundations of Indonesian contract law.]]>
