Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Tesis ini membahas tentang Penerapan dan Pelaksanaan Ketentuan Konvensi New York 1958 Sehubungan dengan Hukum Penyelesaian Sengketa Melalui Arbitrase Dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999. Dalam era globalisasi kepastian hukum dalam penanaman modal serta bisnis dan perdagangan internasional sangatlah dibutuhkan dalam hukum penyelesaian sengketa. Diterbitkannya Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa (?UU 30/1999?) sebagai peraturan perundang-undangan yang secara khusus mengatur tentang arbitrase khususnya arbitrase internasional serta untuk memperbaiki hukum penyelesaian sengketa arbitrase di Indonesia sebelum diundangkannya UU tersebut, tetap belum dapat memberikan kepastian hukum dalam pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase asing sebagaimana diamanatkan Konvensi New York 1958. Hal ini dikarenakan UU 30/1999 tidak mengakomodir penuh ketentuan pengakuan dan pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase asing di wilayah Negara Republik Indonesia. Dimana, di satu sisi, Indonesia merupakan Negara anggota Konvensi New York 1958, dan kewajiban internasional yang timbul dari penandatanganan serta peratifikasian ketentuan-ketentuan Konvensi New York 1958 tersebut, seharusnya diterapkan secara utuh dalam ketentuan hukum penyelesaian sengketa melalui arbitrase nasional Indonesia sehingga dapat memberikan predictability, stability, dan fairness kepada pelaku usaha penanaman modal serta bisnis dan perdagangan internasional.

---

This thesis analyzes The Application and Enforcement of New York 1958 Provisions Related to Law of Settlement of Disputes Before Arbitration Provisions Under Law No. 30 Year 1999. In the era of globalization, legal certainty within investment also international business and commercial trade is very important towards the law of settlement of disputes. The enactment of Law Number 30 Year 1999 regarding Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Settlement (?Law 30/1999?) as regulation which specifically regulates arbitration especially international arbitration, and to repair the law of settlement of disputes before arbitration in Indonesia in previous state before the enactment of that Law, still cannot provide legal certainty in the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards as addressed by New York Convention 1958. This condition is due to the Law 30/1999 that does not completely accommodate the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards within the territory of the Republic of Indonesia. Whereas, in the other side, Indonesia is one of the contracting state of New York Convention 1958 and the international liabilities which arisen from the signing and ratification of the Convention, shall be applied completely within the national law of settlement of disputes before arbitration of Indonesia, thus, the related law will provide predictability, stability and fairness towards the investor and the international business and commercial trade actor."

"Untuk menyelesaikan sengketa ada beberapa cara yang bisa dipilih salah satunya adalah melalui arbitrase. Ketentuan mengenai Arbitrase diatur dalam UU No. 30 Tahun 1999. Arbitrase merupakan lembaga volunter yang dipilih dan ditunjuk berdasar kesepakatan para pihak dalam bentuk perjanjian. Perjanjian arbitrase adalah suatu kesepakatan berupa klausula arbitrase yang tercantum dalam suatu perjanjian tertulis yang dibuat para pihak sebelum timbul sengketa atau perjanjian arbitrase tersendiri yang dibuat para pihak setelah timbul sengketa. Pengadilan Negeri tidak mempunyai kewenangan untuk mengadili sengketa para pihak yang telah terikat dalam perjanjian arbitrase, akan tetapi peranan Pengadilan Negeri sangat dibutuhkan. Peranan Pengadilan Negeri dalam arbitrase dapat dilihat dari sebelum proses arbitrase, pada saat arbitrase berlangsung dan yang terpenting pada saat proses arbitrase telah selesai (pendaftaran putusan arbitrase, pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase secara paksa dan pembatalan putusan arbitrase). Terhadap putusan arbitrase dapat dimintakan pembatalannya ke Pengadilan Negeri dengan berlandaskan pada ketentuan Pasal 70 dan Penjelasan Umum Bab VII UU No. 30 Tahun 1999 dan dapat diajukan banding ke Mahkamah Agung. Sengketa yang terjadi antara PT. Comarindo dengan Yemen Airways diputus oleh BANI Surabaya, pihak Yemen Airways mengajukan permohonan pembatalan putusan arbitrase kepada Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan, dengan alasan bahwa BANI Surabaya tidak berwenang untuk memutus sengketa antara Yemen Airways dengan PT. Comarindo. Atas putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan PT. Comarindo mengajukan permohonan banding ke Mahkamah Agung. Tujuan penulisan ini untuk mengetahui apa yang menjadi dasar dalam permohonan pembatalan putusan arbitrase, prosedur pembatalan putusan arbitrase menurut peraturan undang-undang yang berlaku, peranan peradilan umum terkait dengan arbitrase Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian kepustakaan, dengan studi dokumen data sekunder berupa buku-buku teoritis dan undangundang, dengan harapan menghasilkan sifat penulisan yang deskriptif-preskriptif.

---

There are many ways can be chosen to settle a dispute. One of them is through arbitration. Arbitration law is ruled on Act No. 30 Year 1999. Arbitration is a voluntary institution that is chosen based on the agreement by the parties. Arbitration agreement is a decision made by the parties in a written agreement in a form of an arbitration clause or an independent arbitration agreement made after the dispute occurred. The State Court does not have the authority to settle a dispute that has been bound by an arbitration agreement. On the other hand, the role of the court is needed. The role of the court in arbitration can be seen before, in and the most importantly after the process of arbitration (the registration of arbitration award, the execution of arbitration award by force, the annulment of arbitration award). The annulment of arbitration award can be done by making an application to the State Court according to Article 70 and The Explanation of Chapter 7 Act No. 30 Year 1999. This annulment can be challenge to an appeal to The Supreme Court. The dispute between PT. Comarindo and Yemen Airways was settled by The BANI of Surabaya. The Yemen Airways applied an appeal about the arbitration award to South Jakarta State Court. The reason of this appeal is that BANI of Surabaya did not have the authority to settle the dispute between PT Comarindo and Yemen Airways. Then, PT Comarindo applied an appeal about the decision made by South Jakarta State Court to the Supreme Court. The purpose of this analysis is to find out the basis on the annulment of arbitration award, procedures of the annulment of arbitration award according to The Arbitration Law, the role of the court in arbitration. The method used is library research, with documents study on secondary data, consist of theoretic books and laws. This analysis is hoped to result in an descriptive-prescriptive analysis."

"Tesis ini membahas alasan pembatalan putusan arbitrase berdasarkan Undang-Undang No. 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa ("UU No. 30/1999") berdasarkan sifat final dan mengikat putusan arbitrase. Kelebihan arbitrase berupa sifat putusan yang final dan mengikat, pada praktiknya tidak sepenuhnya benar karena baik dalam UU No. 30/1999, New York Convention dan UNCITRAL Model Law terdapat alasan-alasan pembatalan putusan arbitrase, terlebih lagi dalam Penjelasan Umum Bab VII UU No. 30/1999 terdapat frase "antara lain" yang membuka celah adanya alasan lain bagi Pengadilan untuk membatalkan putusan arbitrase di luar ketentuan Pasal 70 UU No. 30/1999. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam menganalisa permasalahan-permasalahan yang dirumuskan pada Bab 1 adalah metode yuridis normatif dan data yang digunakan adalah data primer, sekunder dan tersier. Hasil penelitian tesis ini adalah UU No. 30/1999 mengatur alasan pembatalan putusan arbitrase yang bersifat limitatif, keberadaan frase "antara lain" pada Penjelasan Umum Bab VII UU No. 30/1999 menyebabkan ketidakpastian hukum dan alasan pembatalan putusan arbitrase yang diatur dalam New York Convention dan UNCITRAL Model Law berbeda dengan alasan pembatalan putusan arbitrase dalam UU No. 30/1999. Adapun penelitian ini menyarankan agar Penjelasan Umum Bab VII UU No. 30/1999 dimohonkan pembatalannya ke Mahkamah Konstitusi karena frase "antara lain" dalam Penjelasan Umum Bab VII UU No. 30/1999 tersebut bertentangan dengan Pasal 70 UU No. 30/1999 dan mereduksi sifat final dan mengikat putusan arbitrase.

---

This thesis discusses the reasons for the revocation of arbitral award under the Act No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution ("Law No. 30/1999") based on the character of the final and binding arbitration award. The advantage of arbitration is the character of its final and binding award, while in practice it is not entirely true because either in the Law 30/1999, the New York Convention or in the UNCITRAL Model Law, the reasons for the revocation of the arbitration award can be found, moreover, in General Explanation Chapter VII of Law No. 30/1999 contained the phrase "among others" which opened the rift for other reasons for the Court to revoke the arbitral award beyond the provision of Article 70 of Law No. 30/1999.

The method used in analyzing problems formulated in Chapter 1 is normative juridical method and the data which used are primary, secondary and tertiary data.

The results of this thesis are the Law 30/1999 regulate the limited revocation of arbitral award, where the phrase "among others" on the General Explanation of Chapter VII of the Act No. 30/1999 cause legal uncertainty and the reasons for the revocation of an arbitral award which is set in the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law are different from the reasons for the revocation of arbitral award in Law 30/1999.

This thesis suggests that General Explanation Chapter VII of Law No. 30/1999 should be applied for its revocation to the Constitutional Court because the phrase "among others" in the General Explanation Chapter VII of Law No. 30/1999 contrary to Article 70 of Law No. 30/1999 and reducing the final and binding character of arbitral award."