cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Agus Sumpena
Contact Email
agus.sumpena@unpad.ac.id
Phone
-
Journal Mail Official
banijournal@gmail.com
Editorial Address
Wahana Graha Lt. 1 & 2 Jl. Mampang Prapatan No. 2, Jakarta 12760
Location
Kota adm. jakarta pusat,
Dki jakarta
INDONESIA
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal
Published by Badan Arbirase Nasional Indonesia
ISSN : -     EISSN : 30890047     DOI : https://doi.org/10.63400/balj
Core Subject : Economy, Social,
Economics, Econometrics & Finance Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal is a journal in the fields of arbitration, dispute resolution and law regulating the mechanism of arbitration and dispute resolution in particular in Indonesia and the regions, including South-East Asia (ASEAN). BANI Arbitration and Law Journal publishes twice a year in April and October. BANI Arbitration and Law Journal invites academics, researchers and practitioners to submit their unpublished articles or research on arbitration, dispute resolution or their related regulations. The language of journal is Indonesian and English. BANI Arbitration and Law Journal objective is set to become the leading international journal on arbitration focusing the progressive development of arbitration and alternative dispute resolution and their regulations. BANI Arbitration and Law Journal publishes theoretical and practical contributions on arbitration, dispute resolutions and their regulations.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 15 Documents
 1   2 
Dampak dari Putusan No. 15/PUU-XII/2014 terhadap Eksistensi Arbitrase di Indonesia: Menguji Kembali Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Rossdiono, Anangga W.; Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2024
Publisher : Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63400/balj.v1i1.1

Abstract

AbstrakSesuai dengan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 15/PUU-XII/2014, Penjelasan Pasal 70 Undang-Undang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa bertentangan dengan UUD 1945 Republik Indonesia; sehingga tidak lagi memiliki kekuatan hukum yang mengikat. Substansi dari penjelasan tersebut mengharuskan pemohon yang berusaha membatalkan putusan arbitrase untuk terlebih dahulu membuktikan alasan pengajuan mereka di Pengadilan Negeri. Berdasarkan putusan ini, syarat tersebut tidak lagi ada, sehingga mempermudah proses pembatalan putusan arbitrase. Di sisi lain, keberadaan Pasal 70 undang-undang itu sendiri masih menjadi perdebatan. Dalam perkembangannya, pasal ini memberikan berbagai implikasi hukum yang negatif bagi lembaga penyelesaian sengketa di luar pengadilan, termasuk lembaga arbitrase, serta pihak-pihak yang menyelesaikan sengketa melalui arbitrase. Meskipun demikian, mekanisme ini secara normatif bertujuan untuk mengoreksi kesalahan formal dalam putusan arbitrase. Tulisan ini berusaha menggambarkan rasionalisasi di balik perlunya mempertahankan atau menghilangkan mekanisme tersebut dengan meninjau kembali Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 15/PUU-XII/2014. Sebagai kesimpulan di akhir artikel, disarankan agar Pasal 70 Undang-Undang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa perlu dihilangkan atau setidaknya dibatasi secara ketat. AbstractPursuant to Constitutional Court Decision Number 15/PUU-XII/2014, the Elucidation of Article 70 of the Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Law was contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia; thus, it no longer had binding legal force. The substance of the elucidation required applicants attempting to annul an arbitral award to first prove the grounds for their application before the District Court. According to this decision, such a requirement did not longer exist, thus it would be easier to annull an arbitral award. On the other hand, the existence of Article 70 of the law itself is still debatable. In its development, this article has provided various legal implications that have negative values for dispute resolution institutions outside the court, including arbitration institutions, as well as parties resolving their disputes through arbitration. Nonetheless, this mechanism is intended normatively to correct formal errors in an arbitral award. This paper attempts to describe the rationalization behind the need to maintain or eliminate such a mechanism by re-examining Constitutional Court Decision Number 15/PUU-XII/2014. As a resolution at the end of the article, it is Article 70 of the Law on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution that should need to be eliminated or at least strictly limited.
The Implementation of Parties Autonomy and Authority of Bani Region of Business Disputes Resolution Sidik, Jafar
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2024
Publisher : Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63400/balj.v1i1.2

Abstract

Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia so called BANI Arbitration Center (“BAC”) is an independent institution that provides services in settling disputes outside the state court. BANI is domiciled in Jakarta and there are BANI Region located in various big cities in Indonesia: Bandung, Surabaya, Medan, Denpasar, Palembang, Pontianak, and Jambi, acting autonomously and independently in upholding law and justice. The parties still have disagreements on where to take themselves if there is a dispute between them. Dispute settlement through BANI has become the choice of business actors to resolve their trade disputes. In addition to the characteristics of being fast, efficient, and thorough, arbitration adheres to the principle of a win-win solution and is straight forward because there are no appeals and cassation institutions. The arbitration fee is also more measurable because the process is faster. Another advantage of arbitration is that its decisions are immediately (final) and binding, apart from its confidential nature, in which the trial process and arbitration award are not published. The object of the study is the settlement of business dispute through BANI Region. The purpose of this writing is to analyze and describe (a) how does the implementation of parties authonomy in arbitration; (b) can the parties choose the forum of arbitration through BANI Region? (c) Has BANI Region have the authority or competency to examine and decide business disputes? (d) to what extent is the role of BANI Region in law enforcement in Indonesia? This paper uses a normative juridical approach with a qualitative analysis method on RI Law No. 30 Year 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution and the 2022 BANI Rules and Procedures. The conclusion are that the disputing parties (a) They implemented parties authonomy in arbitration; namely befor, during and after dispute arises till the implement of arbitral award; (b) They can choose forum for dispute settlement through BANI Region; (c) BANI Region have the authority to examine and decide trade disputes; (d) BANI Region have a strategic role in law enforcement in Indonesia.
Prinsip Itikad Baik (Good Faith) dalam Hukum Kontrak Adolf, Huala
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2024
Publisher : Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63400/balj.v1i1.3

Abstract

AbstrakKonsep good-faith (itikad baik) sudah menjadi bagian dari setiap sistem hukum di berbagai negara di dunia. Salah satu permasalahan dengan prinsip ini adalah pengertiannya: apa yang dimaksud dengan prinisp ini. Tulisan ini berupaya meneliti dan mendapatkan pengertian yang dapat merepresentasikan pengertian prinsip ini dalam hukum kontrak. Tulisan ini menggunakan metode deskriptif analisis. Bahan hukum yang digunakan adalah berbagai instrumen hukum internasional umumnya seperti Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG) dan UNIDROIT Principles of International Contracts, hukum kontrak nasional, pendapat sarjana, putusan pengadilan nasional Indonesia. Tulisan ini menyimpulkan, prinsip good faith memiliki makna menjalankan kewajiban para pihak dengan benar berdasarkan kontrak. AbstractThe principle of good faith has become an important element in legal systems in the world. One of the problems of the principle is its meaning: what good faith would mean. This article tried to trace and find out the meaning of good faith in contract law. This article applied the descriptive analysis method. The legal data used is the international legal instruments on contract. They included the Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and the UNIDROIT Principles of International Contracts, national contract law, the opinion of scholars, the decision of the Indonesian court. This article concluded, the priniciple of good faith would mean the application obligations in a right manner based on the contract.
Urgensi Amandemen Terhadap Pasal 70 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Sebagai Salah Satu Variabel Penting dalam Pembangunan Ekonomi Indonesia Yulwansyah, Adhitya; Nataatmadja, Aria Adipura
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2024
Publisher : Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63400/balj.v1i1.4

Abstract

AbstrakPenyelesaian sengketa bisnis/komersial merupakan salah satu variabel penting dalam pembangunan ekonomi, karena hal ini menjadi salah satu indikator yang digunakan oleh komunitas bisnis untuk berinvestasi atau menjalankan usaha di suatu negara. Hal ini juga tercermin dalam kemudahan berusaha (Ease of Doing Business, EoDB) yang dirilis oleh Badan Koordinasi Penanaman Modal (BKPM) Indonesia. Salah satu mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa adalah melalui arbitrase yang diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa (UUAAPS). Arbitrase telah menjadi metode yang dipilih oleh komunitas bisnis untuk menyelesaikan sengketa mereka dibandingkan dengan pengadilan negeri, karena sifat putusan arbitrase yang bersifat final dan mengikat. Namun, di samping beberapa keuntungan menggunakan arbitrase, hukum arbitrase Indonesia memungkinkan adanya kemungkinan untuk membatalkan putusan arbitrase. Dalam beberapa tahun terakhir, permohonan pembatalan putusan arbitrase meningkat sejak diterbitkannya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 15/PUU-XII/2014 pada tahun 2014 yang menyatakan bahwa penjelasan Pasal 70 undang-undang arbitrase tidak mengikat secara hukum. AbstractBusiness/commercial dispute settlement is one of important variables in the economic development, as it is one of the indicators used by business communities to invest or doing business in a country. This matter is also reflected in the Ease of Doing Business (EoDB) Released by Indonesia Investment Coordinating Board (BKPM). One of the dispute settlement mechanisms is through arbitration as regulated in the Indonesia’s Arbitration Law No. 30 of 1999 (UUAAPS). Arbitration has been a preferred method chosen by the business communities to resolve their disputes rather than to the state court due to arbitration’s final and binding characteristic. However, beside some advantages of using arbitration, the Indonesia arbitration law allows the possibility to annul an arbitration award. In recent years, the arbitration award annulment request arises since the publication of the Supreme Court Decree No. 15/PUU-XII/2014 in 2014 which stated the elucidation on article 70 arbitration law is not legally binding.
Sinergitas Perguruan Tinggi dan Lembaga Arbitrase dalam Pembangunan Hukum Dibidang Penyelesaian Sengketa Bisnis Hariyanto, Bambang
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2024
Publisher : Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63400/balj.v1i1.5

Abstract

AbstrakArbitrase sebagai sebuah instrumen penyelesaian sengketa sangat diperlukan dalam perkembangan hukum dan pembangunan hukum modern. Minimnya pengetahuan publik akan arbitrase dinilai tidak hanya dirasakan oleh masyarakat umum tetapi termasuk juga dirasakan oleh kalangan dunia pendidikan. Minimnya arbitrase dimasukan dalam kurikulum perguruan tinggi merupakan potret bahwa arbitrase tidak begitu populer di program studi yang memiliki relevansi dengan arbitrase seperti fakultas hukum dan fakultas ekonomi dan bisnis. Literasi dan pengetahuan yang seharusnya di dapatkan di perguruan tinggi terkait arbitrase menjadikan arbitrase tidak populer dipilih sebagai tempat penyelesaian sengketa. Ditambah lagi sifat persidangan arbitrase yang tertutup yang menyebabkan tidak terdapat ruang bagi publik khususnya mahasiswa untuk mengenal persidangan arbitrase secara langsung layaknya persidangan di Pengadilan yang terbuka untuk umum. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengidentifikasi, mengevaluasi dan menganalisis mengenai sinergitas perguruan tinggi dan lembaga arbitrase dalam pembangunan hukum terkait penyelesaian sengketa bisnis di Indonesia. Metode penelitian menggunakan jenis penelitian yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan konseptual, pendekatan filsafat, pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan futuristik. Hasil penelitian menjawab bahwa perguran tinggi dan lembaga arbitrase memiliki peran penting dalam pembangunan hukum di sektor penyelesaian sengketa bisnis. Sinergitas kampus dan Lembaga arbitrase dalam dalam upaya edukasi tentang penyelesaian sengketa bisnis dinilai sebagai tahap awal dalam menyiapkan para calon pelaku bisnis dan praktisi bisnis yang terlibat dalam sengketa termasuk dalam mengkader para pemangku kepentingan yang berperan dalam memutus sengketa bisnis. Pada akhirnya, sinergitas kampus dan perguruan tinggi dalam memberikan pengajaran/pendidikan terkait arbitrase menjadi support system terhadap penyelesaian sengketa bisnis di masa depan, yang tidak hanya berdampak pada pemahaman tentang arbitrase dan kedudukannya dalam penyelesaian sengketa bisnis, tetapi juga berdampak pada utuhnya pemahaman bagi mahasiswa sebagai penegak hukum dan pelaku bisnis di masa depan bahwa penyelesaian sengketa tidak selalu di pengadilan. AbstractArbitration as a dispute resolution instrument is essential in the development of law and the advancement of modern legal systems. The public's lack of knowledge about arbitration is not only felt by the general population but also within the educational community. The limited inclusion of arbitration in university curricula reflects its low popularity in study programs relevant to arbitration, such as law, economics, and business faculties. The lack of literacy and knowledge that should be obtained at the university level regarding arbitration contributes to its unpopularity as a chosen method of dispute resolution. Additionally, the closed nature of arbitration proceedings prevents the public, particularly students, from experiencing arbitration trials directly, unlike court trials that are open to the public. The aim of this research was to identify, evaluate, and analyze the synergy between universities and arbitration institutions in the development of legal frameworks related to business dispute resolution in Indonesia. The research employed a normative juridical method with a conceptual approach, philosophical approach, legislative approach, and futuristic approach. The findings indicated that universities and arbitration institutions play a crucial role in the development of law in the field of business dispute resolution. The synergy between universities and arbitration institutions in educating about business dispute resolution was seen as an initial step in preparing future business actors and practitioners involved in disputes, including training stakeholders who play a role in resolving business disputes. Ultimately, the collaboration between universities and arbitration institutions in providing education related to arbitration became a support system for business dispute resolution in the future, impacting not only the understanding of arbitration and its position in business dispute resolution but also providing a comprehensive understanding for students as future legal enforcers and business actors that dispute resolution did not always take place in court.
Arbitrator: Negarawan Pengusung Postulat Honeste Vivere Purwanto, Purwanto; Hage, Markus Yohanis
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal Vol. 1 No. 2 (2025): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 2, April 2025
Publisher : Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63400/balj.v1i2.13

Abstract

AbstrakArbitrase telah berkembang dari mekanisme sederhana menjadi sistem yang kompleks dalam menyelesaikan sengketa perdagangan internasional. Prinsip utama arbitrase mencakup otonomi para pihak, pacta sunt servanda, itikad baik, independensi, non-intervensi, dan efisiensi, sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang-Undang No. 30 Tahun 1999. Penelitian ini berangkat dari pentingnya profesionalisme dan akuntabilitas arbitrator dalam memastikan keadilan yang efektif dan dapat dipercaya. Rumusan masalah penelitian ini adalah bagaimana idealnya arbitrator menurut postulat Honeste Vivere. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mendeskripsikan peran arbitrator sebagai negarawan yang menjunjung tinggi moralitas hukum dan keadilan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa arbitrator yang ideal harus memiliki integritas, kapasitas hukum yang mumpuni, serta komitmen terhadap keadilan substantif. Dengan menjunjung prinsip Honeste Vivere, arbitrator berperan sebagai primus inter pares yang tidak hanya menerapkan hukum secara teknis tetapi juga mempertimbangkan aspek moral dan sosial dalam setiap putusannya.AbstractArbitration has evolved from a simple mechanism into a complex system for resolving international trade disputes. The main principles of arbitration include party autonomy, pacta sunt servanda, good faith, independence, non-intervention, and efficiency, as stipulated in Law No. 30 of 1999. This study emphasizes the importance of professionalism and accountability in arbitrators to ensure effective and reliable justice. The research problem formulated in this study is: how should an ideal arbitrator be defined according to the Honeste Vivere postulate? The purpose of this study is to describe the role of an arbitrator as a statesman who upholds legal morality and justice. The study's findings indicate that an ideal arbitrator must possess integrity, sufficient legal expertise, and a strong commitment to substantive justice. By upholding the Honeste Vivere principle, an arbitrator acts as a primus inter pares, not only applying the law technically but also considering moral and social aspects in every decision made
Peran Notaris dalam Proses Arbitrase Sidik, Jafar
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal Vol. 1 No. 2 (2025): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 2, April 2025
Publisher : Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63400/balj.v1i2.14

Abstract

Seperempat abad lebih usia Undang-Undang tentang Arbitrase Indonesia, yaitu Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang “Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa”, namun undang-undang tersebut masih belum dipahami dengan baik bahwa terdapat amanah atau pesan penting dari uundang-undang tersebut sebagaimana disebutkan dalam Pasal 9 ayat (2) bagi Pejabat Umum Notaris. Notaris adalah pejabat umum yang berwenang untuk membuat akta otentik dan kewenangan lainnya sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Undang-Undang No.2 Tahun 2014 tentang Jabatan Notaris, antara lain dalam Pasal 15 ayat (2) huruf (e) untuk memberikan penyuluhan hukum sehubungan dengan pembuatan akta. Artikel ini akan membahas seputar amanah atau pesan UU tersebut. Artikel ini akan menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif dan deskriptif analitis serta studi kepustakaan (library research).
The Enforceability of the Decision of the Construction Dispute Board in Indonesia Haliman, Yudi; Adolf, Huala; Fakhriah, Efa Laela; Murwadji, Tarsisius
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal Vol. 1 No. 2 (2025): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 2, April 2025
Publisher : Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63400/balj.v1i2.15

Abstract

The emergence of the Dispute Board in Indonesia through Law Number 2 of 2017 on Construction Services raises several challenges, including the complexity of the dispute resolution process, the unclear legal status of decisions, and the lack of recognition within the existing arbitration legal framework. Using a legal normative approach, this research explores the issue in the dispute resolution mechanism under the Law Number 2 of 2017, analyses the main obstacles, and formulates recommendations for improving the effectiveness of the Dispute Board. This research in particular emphasized the enforceability of the decision of the Construction Dispute Board. The method to this problems was to analyze the provisions under the Law. In addition this article also analyzed the main provision on the settlement of disputes, including the possibility of the legal recognition of the Dispute Construction Board in view of the institutional aspects under the Law No 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution. This article found that the complexity of the dispute resolution process through the Construction Dispute Board, along with the high cost and lack of clarity regarding the enforceability of judgments, creates uncertainty for the parties. This marred the deicison of the Construction Dispute Board.
Urgensi Pembaharuan Hukum Penyelesaian Sengketa Melalui Mediasi Wiko, Garuda
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal Vol. 1 No. 2 (2025): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 2, April 2025
Publisher : Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63400/balj.v1i2.16

Abstract

AbstrakMediasi merupakah salah satu bentuk Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa (APS) yang menawarkan kelebihan dibanding litigasi dan arbitrase dari sisi biaya, fleksibilitas, maupun waktu penyelesiaan. Namun, dalam praktik di Indonesia, media masih sering dipandang sebagai mekanisme formalitas yang dilalui para pihak sebelum memasuki forum ajudikatif. Meskipun telah diatur dalam sistem hukum positif sejak berlakunya Undang-Undang No. 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan APS, pengaturan mediasi masih sangat terbatas dan belum mampu menjawab kebutuhan praktis di lapangan. Mediasi di pengadilan diatur melalui beberapa Peraturan Mahkamah Agung, termasuk Perma No. 1 tahun 2016 dan Perma No. 3 Tahun 2022, tetapi ruang lingkupnya hanya mencakup perkara perdata di pengadilan. Di luar itu, mekanisme mediasi masih minim basis regulasi. Dalam perkembangan global, mediasi semakin mendapat tempat sebagai instrumen penyelesaian sengketa yang kredibel, ditandai dengan disahkannya Singapore Convention on Mediation tahun 2019. Konvensi ini memberikan jaminan eksekutorial bagi kesepakatan hasil mediasi lintas negara, sehingga berperan penting dalam menciptakan iklim bisnis yang aman dan stabil. Bagi Indonesia, pembaruan hukum mediasi menjadi mendesak, baik melalui pembentukan UU Mediasi yang komprehensif maupun dengan meratifikasi Konvensi Mediasi. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk memberikan argumentasi pembaruan regulasi mediasi di Indonesia melalui pembentukan UU Mediasi dan ratifikasi konvensi internasional agar mediasi dapat berfungsi optimal sebagai instrumen penyelesaian sengketa di era modern, baik nasional maupun internasional. Abstract Mediation is a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) that offers advantages over litigation and arbitration in terms of cost, flexibility, and resolution time. However, in Indonesian practice, media is still often viewed as a formality mechanism that parties go through before entering an adjudicatory forum. Although it has been regulated in the positive legal system since the enactment of Law No. 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and APS, mediation regulations are still very limited and unable to meet practical needs in the field. Mediation in court is regulated by several Supreme Court Regulations, including Perma No. 1 of 2016 and Perma No. 3 of 2022, but their scope only covers civil cases in court. Beyond that, the mediation mechanism still lacks a regulatory basis. In global developments, mediation is increasingly gaining ground as a credible dispute resolution instrument, marked by the ratification of the Singapore Convention on Mediation in 2019. This convention provides enforceable guarantees for agreements resulting from cross-border mediation, thus playing a vital role in creating a safe and stable business climate. For Indonesia, reforming mediation law is urgent, both through the establishment of a comprehensive Mediation Law and by ratifying the Mediation Convention. This article aims to provide arguments for reforming mediation regulations in Indonesia through the establishment of a Mediation Law and the ratification of international conventions so that mediation can function optimally as a dispute resolution instrument in the modern era, both nationally and internationally.
Kant’s Concept of Moral Autonomy as a Philosophical Justification of Party Autonomy Prasetiyo, Eko Dwi
BANI Arbitration and Law Journal Vol. 1 No. 2 (2025): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 2, April 2025
Publisher : Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63400/balj.v1i2.17

Abstract

One of the important doctrines in international private law, especially in the field of contract law, is the party autonomy doctrine. Although it has gained enormous acceptance, there is still debate about the existence of the doctrine, as well as disagreements about the exact parameters, scope and boundaries of the doctrine. Kant's categorical imperative: "Act so that the maxim of thy will can always at the same time hold good as a principle of universal legislation," is the principle of individual moral autonomy as a universal law-making agent based on the autonomy of the will. This principle provides a philosophical justification for the existence of party autonomy. Based on Kant's idea, a categorical imperative is obtained that guides every rational being in viewing the doctrine of party autonomy, namely by giving respect to every free choice made by the parties in relation to disputes that occur between them. In this way, a transcendental understanding of party autonomy is obtained, which is respect for all rational beings to recognize and uphold every choice made by the parties in a dispute resolution that occurs.

Page 1 of 2 | Total Record : 15

 1   2 

Filter by Year

2024 2025


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 2, Issue 1, October 2025 Vol. 1 No. 2 (2025): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 2, April 2025 Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): BANI Arbitration and Law Journal, Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2024