•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Advancement in technology brought many inevitable changes with more efficiency, making human life easier. Benefit of technology shall be incorporated for effective and efficient justice delivery in dispute resolution mechanism. New development in this area is online arbitration dispute resolutions (ODR) which have been without doubt adopted and practices by justice delivery system across the globe. But the question remains the same as whether justice delivery system is equipped to cope up in the same pace with the changes taking place in the society and technology. Are the existing laws being enough to conduct online system as an effective mechanism to settle disputes among the parties? Keeping in context the preceding query, the present research resorted tracing the laws relevant to the use of ODR mechanism in India and Indonesia, as their present legal framework of arbitration addressing dispute resolution through the ODR mechanism lack specific laws. The present research adopts a mixed method using both primary and secondary data for tracing and comparison the ODR system in India and Indonesia. It is concluded that ODR deliverance are valid and enforceable in the present legal framework of both the countries. Therefore, people must not be doubtful while using ODR mechanism to settle their disputes. It also demonstrates that an ample scope is there in the existing laws of both the countries to accommodate and enhance the overall process and deliverance of ODR mechanism through amendments and separate guidelines.

Bahasa Abstract

Kemajuan teknologi membawa banyak perubahan yang tak terhindarkan dengan efisiensi yang lebih, membuat hidup manusia lebih mudah. Manfaat teknologi harus dimasukkan untuk penyampaian keadilan yang efektif dan efisien dalam mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa. Perkembangan baru di bidang ini adalah penyelesaian sengketa arbitrase online (ODR) yang tidak diragukan lagi telah diadopsi dan dipraktikkan oleh sistem penyampaian keadilan di seluruh dunia. Namun pertanyaannya tetap sama apakah sistem penegakan keadilan dilengkapi untuk mengatasi dengan kecepatan yang sama dengan perubahan yang terjadi di masyarakat dan teknologi. Apakah undang-undang yang ada sudah cukup untuk melakukan sistem online sebagai mekanisme yang efektif untuk menyelesaikan perselisihan di antara para pihak? Tetap dalam konteks pertanyaan sebelumnya, penelitian ini mencoba menelusuri undang-undang yang relevan dengan penggunaan mekanisme ODR di India dan Indonesia, karena kerangka hukum arbitrase mereka saat ini yang menangani penyelesaian sengketa melalui mekanisme ODR tidak memiliki undang-undang khusus. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode campuran dengan menggunakan data primer dan sekunder untuk menelusuri dan membandingkan sistem ODR di India dan Indonesia. Disimpulkan bahwa pembebasan ODR adalah sah dan dapat dilaksanakan dalam kerangka hukum kedua negara saat ini. Oleh karena itu, masyarakat tidak boleh ragu-ragu dalam menggunakan mekanisme ODR untuk menyelesaikan sengketanya. Ini juga menunjukkan bahwa ada ruang lingkup yang luas dalam undang-undang yang ada di kedua negara untuk mengakomodasi dan meningkatkan keseluruhan proses dan pelaksanaan mekanisme ODR melalui amandemen dan pedoman terpisah.

References

Agrawal, Akankshha. (online at March, 2020). ‘‘With judiciary embracing technology, time to push dispute resolution online.’ Business Standard. Retrieved from https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/with-judiciary-embracing-technology-time-to-push-dispute-resolution-online-120032901023_1.html

Arjun Panditrao Khotkar vs Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, Civil Appeal No. 20825-20826 of 2017. (2017).

Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia (BANI). Retrieved from https://www.baniarbitration.org/

Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act 2015.

Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1958. Retrieved from https://www.newyorkconvention.org/english

Cyber Settle. Retrieved from http://www.cybersettle.com/

Delhi Dispute Resolution Society, ‘Online Mediation.’ Retrieved from http://mediation.delhigovt.nic.in/wps/wcm/connect/doit_ddrs/DELHI+DISPUTES+RESOLUTION+SOCIETY/Home/Online+Mediation

E.Katsh and J. Rifkin (2001). ‘Online Dispute Resolution: Resolving Conflicts in Cyberspace.’, Publication house “Wiley”. Retrieved from

Gintarepetreikyte. 2016. “ODR Platforms: eBay Resolution Center.” Speech, 15th ODR Conference, 14 April 2016. Retrieved from https://20160dr.wordpress.com/2016/04/14/odr-platforms-ebay-resolution-center/

https://uncitral.un.org/sites/uncitral.un.org/files/media-documents/uncitral/en/v1700382_english_technical_notes_on_odr.pdf

https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Online+Dispute+Resolution%3A+Resolving+Conflicts+in+Cyberspace-p-9780787956769

ICOD. Retrieved from https://icodr.org/sample-page/

Indonesia - The New Regulation On E-Litigation. SC Regulation No. 1/2019 and SC decree No. 129/2019. Report of 2019. Retrieved from https://www.conventuslaw.com/report/indonesia-the-new-regulation-on-e-litigation/

Justice N.V. Ramana. (2020). Delay reduction at different tiers of the court system, pre-trial settlement (use of conciliation procedures for dispute resolution), (Conference Paper, The experience of the Supreme Courts of Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) countries,2020). Retrieved from http://eng.sectsco.org/news/20190625/556607.html

Kinhal, Deepika. (online at May 2020). Every Crisis Presents an Opportunity – It’s Time for India to Ramp Up its ODR Capabilities. Live Law. Retrieved from https://www.livelaw.in/columns/every-crisis-presents-an-opportunity-its-time-for-india-to-ramp-up-its-odr-capabilities-154196

M. Anasuya Devi and Anr. v. Manik Reddy and Ors, 8 SCC 565. (2003).

M/s Umesh Goel v. Himachal Pradesh Cooperative Group Housing Society, 11 SCC 313. (2016)

M/s. Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd v. Jindal Exports Ltd, (6) SCC 356. (2001)

M/S. Shri Ram EPC Limited v Rioglass Solar SA, SCC Online 147. (2018).

Narayan Trading Co. v. Abcom Trading Pvt. Ltd, SCC OnLine MP 8645. (2012)

Naval Gent Maritime Ltd v Shivnath Rai Harnarain (I) Ltd, 174 DLT 391. (2009)

New Mexico Courts. Retrieved from https://www.nmcourts.gov/ODR.aspx

Nicolas De Witt. (2012). Online International Arbitration: Nine Issues Crucial to its Success. Journal of the American Review of International Arbitration Vol.12, 462.

NITI Ayog. (October, 2020). The NITI Aayog Expert Committee on ODR “Designing the Future of Dispute Resolution: The ODR Policy Plan for India Draft for Discussion’. Niti Aayog Website. Retrieved from https://niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2020-10/Draft-ODR-Report-NITI-Aayog-Committee.pdf

PEC Limited v. Austbulk Shipping SDN BHD, Civil Appeal No. 4834 of 2007. (2018)

Saigal, Sonam. (online at October,2020). Pandemic affected access to justice: Chief Justice of India. The Hindu. Retrieved from https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/cji-inaugurates-e-resource-centre-virtual-court-in-nagpur/article32992383.ece

Shakti Bhog v Kola Shipping, S.L.P.(C) No.16109 (2007).

Smartsettle. Retrieved from https://www.smartsettle.com/

State of Maharashtra V. Praful Desai, 4 SCC 601 9 (2003).

Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. Abdul Samad and Anr, 3 SCC 622. (2018)

Supreme Court of India. SUVAS. Retrieved from https://main.sci.gov.in/pdf/Press/press%20release%20for%20law%20day%20celebratoin.pdf

The Mediation Room. Retrieved from https://www.themediationroom.com/

Trimex International v Vedanta Aluminium Ltd, 2 SCC 134 (2009).

United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, ‘UNCITRAL Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution 2017.’ Retrieved from

United Nations Treaty Collection, Geneva Convention on the Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1927. Retrieved from https://treaties.un.org/Pages/LONViewDetails.aspx?src=LON&id=549&chapter=30&clang=_en

Vermeys, Nicolas W. & Benyekhlef, Karim, ‘ODR and the Courts’, in Mohamed S Abdel Wahab & others (ed), Online Dispute Resolution: Theory and Practice: A Treatise on Technology and Dispute Resolution. (pp. 307-324). The Hague : Eleven International Pub. Retrieved from https://www.mediate.com/pdf/vermeys_benyekhlef.pdf

Vitol S.A v. Bhatia International Limited, SCC OnLine Bom 1058. (2014).

Download

Share

COinS