The Legality of Inclusion of The Indonesian National Arbitration Board as The Responsible Responsible in The Application for Announcement of The Arbitration Award
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58812/wslhr.v4i03.2965Keywords:
Arbitration, BANI, Annulment of Arbitral Awards, Ultra Vires, IndonesiaAbstract
This study is motivated by the recurring practice of naming the Indonesian National Arbitration Board (BANI) as the Respondent in applications for the annulment of arbitral awards, despite being inconsistent with Law Number 30 of 1999 and Supreme Court Regulation Number 3 of 2023. This research aims to examine the limits of the District Court's authority in reviewing applications for annulment of arbitral awards and to determine whether judgments imposing liability on BANI may be classified as ultra vires. The findings indicate that the District Court's authority is limited to examining the statutory grounds for annulment under Article 70 of the Arbitration Law. The inclusion of BANI as a respondent constitutes an error in person, while any judgment imposing liability on BANI exceeds the court's legal authority and therefore may be classified as an ultra vires decision.
References
[1] G. P. S. RM, Arbitrase dan mediasi di Indonesia. Gramedia Pustaka Utama, 2006.
[2] S. A. Nugroho and M. H. Sh, Penyelesaian Sengketa Arbitrase dan Penerapan Hukumnya. Kencana, 2017.
[3] G. P. Dodi and M. Sh, Arbitrase Dalam Sistem Hukum Indonesia. Prenada Media, 2022.
[4] S. HANAFI and G. RAMADHAN, HUKUM PERJANJIAN ANTARA TEORI DAN PRAKTIK DI INDONESIA. CV. CAKRAWALA RISET, 2026.
[5] S. H. Garuda Wiko, ARBITRASE DAN ALTERNATIF PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA: Perspektif Nasional dan Internasional. Penerbit KBM Indonesia, 2026.
[6] M. Situmorang, “Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase,” J. Penelit. Huk. Jure, vol. 20, no. 4, p. 573, 2020.
[7] A. Andriani, “Akibat Hukum Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase dalam Kaitannya dengan Prinsip Final and Binding,” AL-MANHAJ J. Huk. Dan Pranata Sos. Islam, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 25–36, 2022.
[8] M. C. P. Shara, “Upaya pembatalan putusan arbitrase di Indonesia berdasarkan perspektif hukum arbitrase internasional,” Kerta Dyatmika, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2023.
[9] I. G. Pratidina, “Interpretasi Mahkamah Agung Terhadap Alasan Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Dalam Pasal 70 UU No. 30/1999,” Yuridika, vol. 29, no. 3, p. 311, 2014.
[10] F. Wajdi, U. S. Lubis, and D. Susanti, Hukum Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa Bisnis: dilengkapi arbitrase online dan arbitrase syariah. Sinar Grafika, 2023.
[11] Y. Permatasari, “Kewenangan pengadilan dalam pembatalan putusan arbitrase internasional di Indonesia,” J. Priv. Law, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 26–33, 2017.
[12] W. Siswanto, “Argumentasi Hukum Pembatalan Sengketa Bisnis Badan Arbitrase Nasional (BANI) oleh Pengadilan Negeri,” J. Glob. Ilm., vol. 1, no. 6, pp. 405–418, 2024.
[13] A. H. Waruwu, T. Kamello, T. K. D. Azwar, and A. Harris, “Kewenangan Arbiter dalam Memutus Sengketa Bisnis Arbitrase Secara Ex Aequo Et Bono,” Locus J. Acad. Lit. Rev., pp. 986–999, 2023.
[14] Y. Nurhayati, “Perbandingan Konsep Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Di Beberapa Negara,” J. Ius Const., vol. 7, no. 2, p. 335, 2022.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Habibullah Alfarizi P.R., Mutiara Bella Alfianti, Siti Khamidah, Desya Septya Mulyana
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Facebook 
Instagram 
Twitter 
Youtube 
westscience.journals@gmail.com