The Concept of Competence-Competence: An Indonesian Approach
Abstract
In international arbitration, the concept of competence-competence, which allows an arbitral tribunal to make decisions in cases within its own jurisdiction, is regarded as a fundamental principle. However, state adoption of the notion into their national law has shown that each nation applies this principle in different ways. In order to understand how the principle of competence-competence is used in the jurisdiction of Indonesian courts, it is important first to understand the country’s legal system. Our findings demonstrated that the Indonesian legal system needs to clearly apply the competence-competence concept, making it challenging to use the legal basis for arbitration in deciding cases within its own jurisdiction. This affects the Indonesian courts’ recognition of the principle, which has yet to be applied in accordance with the original provision. The authors suggest that Indonesia acknowledge and incorporate the competence-competence concept into its national law so that the principle can guide the court’s practice. Adopting this principle into federal legislation can improve the efficiency of arbitration and contribute to Indonesia becoming a nation with a supportive arbitration environment.
Keywords: Arbitration, Competence-Competence, Arbitral Competence
References
[1] S. Ö. A. The Principle of Separability and Competence-Competence in Turkish Civil Procedure Code No. 6100. Ann la Fac Droit d’Istanbul [Internet]. 2015;45(62):263–76.
[2] Azar Osmanov F. Arbitraj sazisin anlay??s?? v? müst?qillik doktrinas??. Sci. Res. 2022 May;09(5):72–7.
[3] Abbas A, Khan MM, Lohani A. The Optimization of Judicial Involvement in Commercial Arbitration in Pakistan. 2022;42(1):129–35.
[4] Nwaobi EA. The existence of a valid arbitration agreement as a prerequisite for arbitration. Int. J. Law. 2022;8(2):144–149. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ezinwanne-Nwaobi/publication/ 360529341_The_existence_of_a_valid_arbitration_agreement_as_a_prerequisite_for_arbitration/ links/627c2ae437329433d9a975eb/The-existence-of-a-valid-arbitrationagreement- as-a-prerequisite-fo
[5] Todorovic I. A CLOSER LOOK AT THE DOCTRINE OF SEPARABILITY IN ARBITRATION. IUS Law J. 2022;1(1):6-29. Available: http://iuslawjournal.ius.edu.ba/index.php/iuslawjournal/article/view/6
[6] Chillakuru V. The Rule of Competence – Competence : A Comparative Analysis of Indian and English Law. Comtemporary Asia Arbitr. J. 2013;6(1):133–51.
[7] NYSBA. New York Dispute Resolution Lawyer. 2020;13(2).
[8] M. EL-BANA. The Application of the Doctrines of Severability and Competence- Competence in the UAE ????????? ??????? ??? ????????? ????? ????? ??????? ??????? ???????? ???? ?? ????????? by MOHIEELDIN EL-BANA. The British University; 2014.
[9] Susler O. The English Approach to Competence-Competence. Pepperdine Dispute Resolut Law J. 2013;13:427–52.
[10] B. GA., The ‘Gateway’ Problem in International Commercial Arbitration. Yale J Int Law. 2012;37(1):0-50.
[11] Wang W. Research on the Objection to the Jurisdiction of International Commercial Arbitration. Proceedings of the 2022 7th International Conference on Social Sciences and Economic Development (ICSSED 2022), 2022;652:203–208
[12] S. MC. The existence of the doctrine of severability and competence-competence under the constellation of Indonesian arbitration law. Glob Jurist. 2019;19(2):1–13.
[13] Banerjee A. The Interpretation Of The Rule Of Competence – Competence In International Commercial Arbitration From An Indian Perspective Bengaluru, 2020. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3809158.
[14] M. N. The Rule Of Competence-Competence: A Historical &Comparative Analysis Between English-Indian Law. Willamette J Int Law Disput Resolut. 2019;26(1–2):75– 98.
[15] Abugu U, Oduwole A. “An overview of the principle of competence-competence in international commercial arbitration,” CHUKWUEMEKA ODUMEGWU OJUKWU Univ. J. Priv. PUBLIC LAW, COOUJPPL. 2019;2(1):1–7.
[16] Feehily R. Separability in international commercial arbitration; Confluence, conflict and the appropriate limitations in the development and application of the doctrine. Arbitr Int. 2018;34:3355–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/arbint/aiy026.
[17] O. Y. (Editors) Harkrisnowo H. Juwana H, Law and Justice in a Globalized World. London: Taylor and Francis Group; 2018.
[18] Bell GF. Conflicts of Laws and Jurisdictions in Indonesia-related Arbitrations Seated in Singapore – Perspectives From The Tribunal. Indones. Law Rev. 2022;12(1):33–55.
[19] Kurasha PER. South Africa’s jurisdictional challenge with the under-development of cross-border commercial litigation: Litigation v Arbitration. Jure Law J. 2022;55(1):1- 27. https://doi.org/10.17159/2225-7160/2022/v55a1.
[20] Patel BS. ANALYZING THE ARBITRABILITY OF SUBJECT-MATTER. Commonw. Law Rev. J. 2022;8:201–13.
[21] Gary F. Bell, The UNCITRAL Model Law and Asian Arbitration Laws. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2018.
[22] Paliwal S. The More Favorable Regime Within The ‘Overlapping Coverage’ Of Faa Chapters One And Two. Am. Rev. Int. Arbitr. 2012;23(2):267–311.
[23] Central Jakarta District Court. Decision No. 153/PDT.G/2013/PN.JktPSt; 2013.
[24] South Jakarta District Court. Decision No. 454/Pdt.G/1999/PN. JktSel; 1999.
[25] Central Jakarta District Court. Decision No. 238/Pdt.G/2005/PN.JKt.Pst; 2005.