Author(s): Nelly Novianty, Muhamad Amirulloh, Rika Ratna Permata, Eman Suparman
Parties in a dispute usually choose arbitration as their business settlement mechanism to obtain a more dignified substantial justice, instead of just insignificant formal justice for the parties in good faith. Unfortunately, it is hard to achieve such an expectation due to the obligation of arbitration ruling registration to the district court in Article 59 and Article 64 of the Arbitration Law. This regulation has principally weakened the executorial power of the arbitration ruling and has denied its status as independent, final, and binding. This paper discusses the legal principles and theories that may be used to grant independent execution authority to the national arbitration body apart from the district court hegemony. This study focuses on the independent execution of the arbitration body’s rulings under the Arbitration Law through a normative approach. The study used descriptive-analytical research specifications to describe and analyze the arbitration law. The futuristic study method is used to identify regulations related to the independent execution of the arbitration rulings in Indonesia. The results show that in the arbitration law reform on the reinforcement of the national arbitration body and its authority to carry out its rulings, it is necessary to consider theories such as welfare state, development of law, economic analysis towards the law, and unlawful acts. Some of the principles available to be used as the basis to reinforce the arbitration law mentioned are the principles of legal certainty, good faith, binding power, and simple-fast-affordable dispute resolution.