The Limits of Arbitrator Immunity and Institutional Responsibility in the Annulment of Arbitration Awards: A Normative Study under Indonesian Arbitration Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70826/jsisnu.v3i1.1253Keywords:
Arbitration, Annulment of Decision, Liability, Legal ProcedureAbstract
Arbitration has become a preferred mechanism for resolving commercial disputes because it offers confidentiality, procedural flexibility, efficiency, and finality of decisions. Although arbitral awards are generally final and binding, Indonesian law recognizes a limited mechanism for their annulment under Article 70 of Law Number 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution, allowing judicial intervention where an award is based on forged documents, concealed decisive evidence, or fraudulent conduct during arbitral proceedings. This study examines the legal basis for annulment, the legal responsibility of arbitrators and arbitration institutions following annulment, the procedural framework governing annulment applications, and the implications of annulment for arbitral immunity, legal certainty, and public confidence in arbitration. The research employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, comparative, and case approaches. Primary legal materials consist of Indonesian arbitration legislation, while secondary materials include legal doctrines, scholarly books, journal articles, international arbitration principles, and selected judicial decisions. The collected materials are analyzed qualitatively through systematic, conceptual, and comparative legal interpretation. The study finds that annulment constitutes an exceptional form of judicial control rather than an appellate review of arbitral awards. It further demonstrates that arbitrators and arbitration institutions generally benefit from functional immunity derived from their quasi-judicial role, although such immunity is not absolute where fraud, bad faith, conflicts of interest, or acts exceeding arbitral authority are legally established. The study concludes that balancing the principle of finality with institutional accountability is essential to preserving legal certainty and public confidence, while strengthening ethical standards, institutional oversight, procedural transparency, and clearer regulation of arbitral immunity will enhance the credibility and accountability of Indonesia's arbitration system.
Downloads
References
Berutu, A., Harahap, M.S., Aulia, N., Nasution, P.S.F., & Iskandar, Z. (2024). Putusan Arbitrase: Finalitas, Kekuatan Mengikat, Dan Implikasi Hukum Di Indonesia. Jurnal Cendikia Isnu Su, 1(3), 183–189.
Born, G.B. (2021). International Commercial Arbitration. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.
Caron, D.D., & Caplan, L.M. (2021). The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules: A Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ezter Limpong, M.J., & Soemartono, G.P. (2025). Virtual To Factual: Online Arbitral Awards Annulled By The Court. Kertha Semaya: Journal Ilmu Hukum, 13(11), 2536–2552.
Felina, C., Kamello, T., Sembiring, R., & Sembiring, I.A. (2023). Penemuan Dokumen Yang Bersifat Menentukan Disembunyikan Pihak Lawan Sebagai Penyebab Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase. Locus Journal Of Academic Literature Review, 2(10), 861–873.
Fulena, V., & Chittoo, H.B. (2023). The “Arbitral Immunity” Dilemma – What Is The Balance? Advances In Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(2), 465–473.
Jurnal Ilmiah Publika. (2022). Tanggung Jawab Hukum Arbiter Dan Badan Arbitrase Atas Putusan Arbitrase Yang Diajukan Pembatalan Di Pengadilan. Jurnal Ilmiah Publika, 10(1), 137–146.
Marzuki, P.M. (2021). Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana.
Moses, M.L. (2023). The Principles and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mubarok, M.A.A., Mutolip, W.A., & Sasi, Y.M. (2025). Tanggung Jawab Etis Dalam Profesi Arbiter Dan Prinsip-Prinsip Penyelesaian Sengketa Melalui Arbitrase. Jurnal Arbitrase Indonesia (Jarbi), 1(2), 23–36.
Putri, A.S., & Hartanto, H. (2019). Pembuktian Unsur Tipu Muslihat Pada Gugatan Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase. Jurnal Verstek, 7(3), xx–xx.
Redfern, A., Hunter, M., Blackaby, N., & Partasides, C. (2022). Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rigel, B., & Soermartono, G.P. (2025). Annulment Of Arbitral Awards As An Instance Of Procedural Abuse. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Kyadiren, 7(2), 1330–1341.
Saragih, D.H. (2025). Prosedur Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Secara Hukum Di Indonesia. Hukumku Legal Review, 1(1), 1–9.
Septiyanda, S., & Abdurrahim, A. (2025). Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Di Indonesia Menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 Tentang Arbitrase Dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa. Terang: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Sosial, Politik Dan Hukum, 2(2).
Sinaga, D.S., & Susanti, C. (2025). Batalnya Putusan Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia Akibat Ketidaknetralan Arbiter. Jurnal Hukum To-Ra, 11(1), 117–130.
Sip Law Firm. (2024). Tata Cara Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase. Sip Law Firm Articles, 1–3.
Taufik, H.F. (2024). Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Akibat Ditemukannya Dokumen Menentukan Yang Disembunyikan: Studi Putusan MA No. 470B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2022. Masalah-Masalah Hukum, 53(2), 191–202.
UNCITRAL. (2008). UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration 1985 with Amendments as Adopted in 2006. New York: United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Khairunnisa Siregar, Najwa Fadila, Nabila Putri Aulia, Randy Harahap, Mhd Imran Pradipta
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
