INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 9274
www.rsisinternational.org
Consistency of Judges' Decisions in Providing Legal Certainty to the
Arbitration Process as a forum for Resolution of Business Disputes in
Indonesia
Syapri Chan
Faculty of Law, Al-Azhar University, Medan
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000756
Received: 31 October 2025; Accepted: 05 November 2025; Published: 23 November 2025
ABSTRACT
In a agreement connection business always There is possibility emergence dispute business often happen due to
one of the party do deny promise or default. In settlement dispute business There is a number of ways that can
chosen by the parties, one of which is through the Arbitration forum. As one of the dispute resolution forums
dispute business, arbitration of course Lots is in demand by the business world. However Thus, certainty law on
implementation decision Arbitration Still become problem alone, because the party that does not satisfied on
decision Arbitration can submit application cancellation decision Arbitration to court. Research This aim for
search and identify judges' decisions in case application cancellation decision Arbitration. Research This use
method study law normative with approach cases and judges' decisions. Research This produce findings
existence a number of consistent judge's decisions in decide case application cancellation decision Arbitration
and of course will give certainty law in the Arbitration process as a forum for resolution dispute business.
Implications from results study This impact on the resolution dispute business through a fast Arbitration forum
as well as binding on the parties, so later No There is again the parties who deliberately for procrastination and/or
No carry out decision Arbitration in a way voluntary.
Keywords : Decision ; Dispute Business ; Arbitration ; Law; Judge
INTRODUCTION
Background
One of challenge big that continues overshadowing development power the judiciary in Indonesia is effort put
the proper role of the judge in realize certainty law, justice, and benefit, as well as put position the interaction
with society and state (the existence of reciprocal relationship). The judge as one of the apparatus enforcer law
have task as one of the determinant something decision from the parties to the dispute, then in the process of
taking decision, the judge must independent and free from influence party wherever. Judge in take decision only
tied to events or relevant facts and rules the law that becomes or made into runway juridical (Fence M. Wantu,
2013).
The judge's decision in case application cancellation decision arbitration (national) start from level District Court
up to appeal level and level review back to the Supreme Court is appropriate questionable, considering Still there
is inconsistency decision Supreme Court in decide case application cancellation decision arbitration said.
Inconsistency decision The Supreme Court refers to Article 70 of the Law Arbitration and APS give rise to two
streams : First, the decision Consistent Supreme Court state that reason cancellation decision arbitration must be
referring to to the contents of Article 70 which are of a nature limited and become Jurisprudence in MARI
Decision No. 729 K/ Pdt.Sus/2008, so that application cancellation decision arbitration that is not referring to to
Article 70 no can justified . Second, the decision The Supreme Court stated that Article 70 is not nature limited
and become Jurisprudence in MARI Decision No. 03/Arb.BTU /2005 dated 17 May 2005 which states the word
or the phrase "among others" in General Explanation of the Law Arbitration and APS allows Applicant for
submit application cancellation decision arbitration with reasons beyond those listed in Article 70 of the Law
Arbitration and APS (Yeni Widowaty and Fadia Fitriyanti, 2016).
Beside that, with cancelled Explanation of Article 70 of the Law Arbitration and APS by the Court the
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 9275
www.rsisinternational.org
Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia with the decision No. 15/PUU/XII/2014 also became gap law for
applicant for submit application cancellation decision arbitration. Another legal loophole that often occurs
utilized for begging cancellation decision arbitration is related existence other regulations that have another
interpretation of competence absolute arbitration (Agus Gurlaya Kartasasmita, 2021).
If inconsistency from 2 (two) decisions This Supreme Court left alone, instead will cause uncertainty law to the
arbitration process as a forum for resolution dispute business and bring up gap laws that can used by parties with
good intentions bad so as not to carry out decision arbitration. If matter This happens, then principle settlement
dispute through effective and efficient arbitration No will achieved (Rengganis, 2011).
The emergence inconsistency decision Supreme Court in interpret reasons application cancellation decision
arbitration naturally will impact on certainty law to the arbitration process as a forum for resolution dispute
business. In providing certainty law to the arbitration process No only in the arbitration process until with
publication decision arbitration (national), but also in the process of efforts the law proposed by the disputing
parties start from District Court up to effort appellate and judicial review law back in the Supreme Court.
Application cancellation decision arbitration This become problem alone in the world of arbitration in Indonesia.
In one side, with openness effort cancellation decision arbitration, this can protect One party from fraud party
against so that open cancel the decision that has been determined. However, on the other hand, the application
cancellation is also utilized for prolong time by another party that is not accept on decision arbitration while
hope get victory in court so that free from obligations that have been decided in decision arbitration.
Due to that, is very much needed decision The Supreme Court examines and adjudicates application cancellation
decision arbitration at the appeal and review levels consistent return. For That need done study to decisions The
Supreme Court in particular examine and judge case application cancellation decision arbitration so that the
problem can solved /explained through study law this.
Formulation Problem
Based on the introduction above, then problems research reviewed is as following:
1. How is it? mechanism effort law Appeal to Supreme Court on application cancellation decision arbitration
?
2. Whether Supreme Court Appeal Decision in case application cancellation decision arbitration Still Can
submitted effort law Judicial review ?
3. How is it? attitude Supreme Court in give certainty law to the arbitration process as a forum for resolution
dispute business in Indonesia?
Objective
specific objectives to be achieved achieved in study this is:
1. Review mechanism effort law Appeal to Supreme Court on application cancellation decision arbitration.
2. Review effort law Review return to Appeal decision in case application cancellation decision arbitration.
3. Review and analyze attitude Supreme Court in give certainty law to the arbitration process as a forum for
resolution dispute business in Indonesia.
Research methods
Study This done with method study juridical normative, namely focused research For study implementation or
rules or norms in law positive (Johnny Ibrahim, 2008). Form from results study This will poured in a way
descriptive. A study descriptive, intended for give a detailed picture Possible about human, state or symptoms
other (Soerjono Soekanto, 2006), which in matter This restricted about cancellation decision arbitration based
on Article 70 of the Law Arbitration and APS, in particular related with Decision the Supreme Court will used
as object study.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 9276
www.rsisinternational.org
Furthermore researchers analyze consideration laws and decisions Supreme Court in examine and judge case
application cancellation decision arbitration, both at the appellate and judicial levels level review back, where
the ingredients the obtained researchers from the Supreme Court Directory website
https://putusan3.mahkamahagung. go.id and https://putusan3.mahkamahagung.go.id.
Data sources used in study This in the form of: secondary data. Legal materials secondary Can originate from
results work scientific scholars, related journals with the issues discussed, and the results study as well as
decisions Supreme Court.
Data collection methods in study This done with method studies bibliography. Literature study in study This
range about certainty law regarding the arbitration process, handling dispute arbitration both in Indonesia and in
other countries as reference handling dispute arbitration in Indonesia.
Data presentation method is presented in form descriptions about the urgency handling in a way special and
more Serious to dispute arbitration with give consistent decisions.
Data analysis methods are carried out with analysis qualitative with testing data and concepts, theories and
doctrines as well as regulation related legislation the urgency handling in a way special and more Serious to
dispute arbitration with give consistent decisions.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Research result
From the results search of the Supreme Court Directory website conducted researchers, then obtained decisions
The Court at the level of Appeal and Supreme Court Review in case application cancellation decision arbitration
presented in the tables below this:
Table 1. Decision Supreme Court on Application Cancellation Decision Arbitration at the Appellate Level
Sumber Putusan Tahun Bidang/Klasifikasi Kaidah Hukum
Putusan Yang Mengikuti Nomor Katalog
929 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016 700 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017 2018 1/Yur/Arbt/2018 Hukum Perdata Putusan pengadilan negeri
312 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017 Khusus yang menolak permohonan
267 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016 pembatalan putusan
9 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2018 arbitrase nasional tidak
939 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016 dapat diajukan upaya
8 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2018 hukum banding ke
212 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2018 Mahkamah Agung.
157 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017 Permohonan banding ke
808 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016 Mahkamah Agung atas
780 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017 putusan pengadilan negeri
211 B/Pt.Sus-Arbt/2018 yang menolak permohonan
pembatalan putusan
arbitrase harus dinyatakan
tidak dapat diterima.
Information:https://putusan3.mahkamahagung.go.id/yurisprudensi/detail/11eae4f18f4c62509d3d31303334333
3.html, Accessed October 15, 2023
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 9277
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 2. Decision Supreme Court on Application Cancellation Decision Arbitration at the Review Level
Sumber Putusan Tahun Bidang/Klasifikasi Kaidah Hukum
Putusan Yang Mengikuti Nomor Katalog
56 PK/Pdt.Sus/2011 2 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017 2018 2/Yur/Arbt/2018 Hukum Perdata Putusan Banding Arbitrase
101 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017 Khusus yang diputus oleh
105 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2015 Mahkamah Agung adalah
42 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017 final dan mengikat dan
84 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017 tidak dapat diajukan
43 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016 peninjauan kembali.
Description: 11eae83f1b70 c9e0b554313532373132. Html, Accessed on October 15, 2023
DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH RESULTS
Appeal
In the provisions of Article 72 paragraph (1) Law Arbitration and APS declared that application cancellation
decision arbitration submitted to district court. Meanwhile That in paragraph (4) of the same article arranged that
to decision the district court can appealed to Supreme Court. In the explanation of Article 72 paragraph (4) .
explained that which is meant with the appeal is only to decision cancellation arbitration using reasons as
intended in Article 70. Based on the provisions the in practice not seldom on decision district court that rejected
or state No can received application cancellation something decision arbitration appealed to Supreme Court.
Opinion Supreme Court against question law whether decision district court that rejected application cancellation
decision arbitration national can submitted effort appellate law Supreme Court or no. At the Plenary Meeting of
the Civil Chamber The Supreme Court which was held on 23-26 October 2016 was agreed upon that on decision
district court as intended No can appealed or review back . Agreement the Then followed by the Civil Chamber
in a way consistent.
Decision first to break in accordance with Civil Chamber agreement the that is Decision No. 929 B/ Pdt.Sus-
Arbt /2016 dated November 14, 2016 ( PT. Angkasa Pura II vs. PT. Ibad Amana Perkasa ). In this case PT.
Angkasa Pura II has filed an appeal against this decision Tangerang District Court. Tangerang District Court in
the verdict state application applicant cancellation decision arbitration No can accepted. On the appeal request
The Supreme Court stated the appeal No can accepted, with consideration:
“That in case a quo Decision Tangerang District Court No is cancellation decision arbitration so that No There
is appeal to Supreme Court ";
“Considering, that based on consideration mentioned above, then to appeal from Applicant the No can accepted
“;
Under consideration the law The Supreme Court stated object the No can justified, because after research in a
way carefully memory April 21, 2016 and counter memory August 2, 2016 connected with considerations of
Judex Facti, in matter This Tangerang District Court, according to with provisions of Article 72 paragraph (4)
of the Law Arbitration and APS, part explanation mentioned, what is meant by with “appeal” is only to
cancellation decision arbitration with use reasons as intended in Article 70 of the Law Arbitration and APS. In
case a quo Decision Tangerang District Court No is cancellation decision arbitration with use reasons as intended
in Article 70 of the Law Arbitration and APS so that No There is appeal to Supreme Court.
To application cancellation the Tangerang District Court previously has give Decision Number 224/Pdt.Sus-
Arb/2016/PN-Tng. dated May 24, 2016 which states application cancellation decision arbitration No can
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 9278
www.rsisinternational.org
accepted, meaning decision Tangerang District Court still concerning problem formality only. However, if
Decision Tangerang District Court granted application cancellation decision arbitration with reasons as intended
in Article 70 of the Law Arbitration and APS and cancel decision arbitration, of course The Supreme Court can
accept effort the law of "appeal" and can continue inspection main matter.
Consideration similar also exists in arbitration appeal decisions other where the appeal is filed on decision district
court that does not cancel decision arbitration, such as in Decision No. 808 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016 dated 17
November 2016, No. 267 B/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016 dated 17 November 2016 and lastly decision No. 212 B/Pdt.Sus-
Arbt/2018 dated March 8, 2018.
With has consistency since end 2016 attitude Supreme Court regarding can whether or not decision district court
that rejected application cancellation decision arbitration appealed to Supreme Court, then this legal stance has
become jurisprudence in the Supreme Court. Great. Jurisprudence intended is Jurisprudence Year 2018 Number
Catalog: 1/Yur/Arbt/2018, Field/Classification: Special Civil Law, with Legal Principles as following: “The
verdict district court that rejected application cancellation decision arbitration national No can submitted legal
appeal to Supreme Court. Appeal to Supreme Court on decision district court that rejected application
cancellation decision arbitration must stated No can accepted";
Legal Appeal for Judicial Review
To decision arbitration specifically arbitration national arranged that decision arbitration can submitted
cancellation to district court if fulfil condition as arranged in Article 70 of the Law Arbitration and Alternative
Dispute Resolution. Then, if the district court grant application cancellation, then decision the can appealed to
Supreme Court. Furthermore, regarding Supreme Court appeal decision is regulated in Article 72 paragraph (3)
of the Law Arbitration and APS which states that decision The Supreme Court is decision in level first and last.
Constitution Arbitration and APS No arrange whether on the appeal decision can submitted Review or No.
Opinion Supreme Court on problem law this, where before in 2017 the Supreme Court held 2 (two) views
different to Arbitration Appeal Decision. This seen for example in decision Supreme Court No. 1
PK/Pdt.Sus/2010 dated May 11, 2010 (Christian Mapailey vs Gunawan Sukardi vs PT. VS Mining Resources),
and several decision others, last decision No. 33 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt /2016 dated May 26, 2016 (BANI vs PT.
Hutama Karya), which contains view that on Arbitration Appeal Decision the can submitted Review. Views law
different this is what is there in Decision No. 56 PK/Pdt.Sus/2011 dated August 23, 2011 (PT. Pertamina EP et
al. vs. PT. Lirik Petroleum). In the decision This is the view of the Supreme Court that to Arbitration Appeal
Decision No can submitted review return.
However, since end 2016 attitude law This changed, the Supreme Court observed that to Arbitration Appeal
Decision No can submitted review back, in line with Decision No. 56 PK/Pdt.Sus/2011. Changes view the started
from Decision No. 105 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2015 dated September 1, 2016 (PT. Menara Perdana vs. PT. Tunas Jaya
Sanur and BANI). In the decision the The Supreme Court stated:
“Considering, that decision Supreme Court Number 26 K/ Pdt.Sus /2013 which was requested review return in
the matter a quo is is appeal decision on case cancellation decision arbitration that is Decision Central Jakarta
District Court Number 528/Pdt.G/ARB/2011/PN.Jkt.Pst. dated March 28, 2012”;
“That based on Article 72 paragraph (4) Law no. 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration determine, against decision
The District Court can submitted appeal to The Supreme Court decided in level first and last, with thus to case
cancellation decision arbitration No There is effort law review return”;
View law as in decision No. 105 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2015 Then strengthened in Civil Chamber agreement 23-25
October 2016 which was stated in SEMA No. 4 of 2016. Outlook This Then implemented in a way consistent in
the Civil Chamber, such as in decision no. 43 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016, No. 2 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016, No. 42 PK/
Pdt.Sus-Arbt /2017, No. 84 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt /2017, and No. 101 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt /2017.
With has consistency since end 2016 attitude The Supreme Court is concerned can whether or not Arbitration
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 9279
www.rsisinternational.org
Appeal Decision submitted Review, can concluded opinion law Supreme Court that Arbitration Appeal Decision
No can submitted the review has been become jurisprudence in the Supreme Court. Jurisprudence intended is
Jurisprudence Year 2018 Number Catalog: 2/Yur/Arbt/2018, Field/Classification: Special Civil Law >>
Arbitration >> Cancellation Arbitration, with Legal Principles as following: “The Arbitration Appeal Decision
made by the Supreme Court is final and binding and cannot be appealed. can submitted review return";
Decision Consistent Supreme Court in give certainty law to the arbitration process
Certainty is an inseparable characteristic of law, especially written legal norms. Law without certainty loses its
meaning because it can no longer serve as a guide to behavior for everyone. Certainty itself is considered one of
the goals of law. Historically, discussions about legal certainty have been ongoing since Montesquieu's idea of
separation of powers .
Social order is closely related to legal certainty, as order is the essence of legal certainty itself. Order allows
people to live with certainty and thus carry out the activities necessary for social life. To clearly understand legal
certainty, the following will outline the definitions of legal certainty from several experts.
Gustav Radbruch put forward 4 (four) basic things related to the meaning of legal certainty, namely: "First, that
law is positive, meaning that positive law is legislation. Second, that law is based on facts, meaning that it is
based on reality. Third, that facts must be formulated in a clear manner to avoid errors in interpretation, while
also being easy to implement. Fourth, positive law must not be easily changed".
Gustav Radbruch's opinion is based on his view that legal certainty is certainty about the law itself. Legal
certainty is a product of law, or more specifically, legislation. Based on this opinion, Gustav Radbruch believes
that positive law, which regulates human interests in society, must always be obeyed, even if it is unjust.
The opinion regarding legal certainty was also put forward by Jan M. Otto as quoted by Sidharta (2006), namely
that legal certainty in certain situations requires the following:
1. There are clear, consistent and easily accessible legal regulations issued by state authorities;
2. That the governing bodies (government) implement these legal regulations consistently and also submit to
and obey them;
3. That the majority of citizens in principle agree with the content and therefore adjust their behavior to these
rules;
4. That independent and impartial judges (courts) apply these legal rules consistently when they resolve legal
disputes; and
5. That judicial decisions are concretely implemented.
The five conditions proposed by Jan M. Otto demonstrate that legal certainty can be achieved if the substance
of the law aligns with the needs of society. Legal regulations that create legal certainty are those that arise from
and reflect the culture of society. This type of legal certainty is called realistic legal certainty, which requires
harmony between the state and the people in orienting and understanding the legal system.
According to Sudikno Mertokusumo (2007), legal certainty is the guarantee that the law is enforced, that those
entitled to it can obtain their rights, and that decisions can be enforced. Although legal certainty is closely related
to justice, law is not identical to justice. Law is general, binding on everyone, and equalizing, while justice is
subjective, individualistic, and non-equalizing.
Legal certainty is the implementation of the law according to its wording so that society can ensure that the law
is implemented. In understanding the value of legal certainty, what must be considered is that this value has a
close relationship with positive legal instruments and the role of the state in actualizing it in positive law
(Fernando M. Manullang, 2007).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 9280
www.rsisinternational.org
Nurhasan Ismail (2006) is of the opinion that creating legal certainty in statutory regulations requires
requirements relating to the internal structure of the legal norms themselves.
“These internal requirements are as follows: First, clarity of the concepts used. Legal norms contain descriptions
of specific behaviors that are then integrated into specific concepts. Second, clarity of the hierarchy of authority
of the institutions that create laws and regulations. This clarity of hierarchy is important because it concerns the
validity and binding of the laws and regulations they create. A clear hierarchy will provide direction to
lawmakers who have the authority to create certain laws and regulations. Third, consistency of legal norms. This
means that the provisions of several laws and regulations related to a particular subject do not contradict each
other.”
Legal certainty requires efforts to regulate law in legislation made by authorized and authoritative parties, so that
these regulations have a legal aspect that can guarantee certainty that the law functions as a regulation that must
be obeyed. In his book, The Morality of Law (1971), Lon Fuller proposed eight principles that must be met by
law. If they are not met, the law will fail to be called law, or in other words, there must be legal certainty. These
eight principles are as follows:
1. A legal system consisting of rules, not based on erroneous decisions for certain matters;
2. The regulations are announced to the public;
3. Not retroactive, as it would damage the integrity of the system;
4. Made in a formula that is understood by the public;
5. There should be no conflicting rules;
6. Must not demand an action that exceeds what can be done;
7. Should not be changed frequently;
8. There must be a match between regulations and daily implementation.
Lon Fuller's opinion above can be said to be that there must be certainty between regulations and their
implementation, thus entering the realm of action, behavior, and factors that influence how positive law is
implemented.
From the opinion expert Regarding the legal certainty mentioned above, certainty can have several meanings,
namely clarity, not open to multiple interpretations, not contradictory, and enforceable. The law must be applied
firmly in society, containing transparency so that anyone can understand the meaning of a legal provision. One
law must not contradict another so as not to become a source of doubt. Legal certainty is a legal instrument of a
country that contains clarity, does not give rise to multiple interpretations, does not give rise to contradictions,
and can be enforced, which is able to guarantee the rights and obligations of every citizen in accordance with
the existing community culture.
The steps that become attention that can conducted by the judge in receive , check and decide case in court , so
the judge's decision can reflect certainty law , justice and benefit in the judiciary civil , is as following :
1. Put every the cases he handled with method to explain every case in a overview. In case This judge
explained in a way brief facts of the matter from A case;
2. Translate or qualify every case the from incident abstract to in incident law or concrete;
3. Selecting rules proper law For made into as base law to incident concrete the ;
4. Do analysis and interpretation to rules law those who have made into as base law in solve the case;
5. Implement rule law the in the case (Fence M. Wantu , 2013).
A judge's decision that reflects utility is one where the judge not only applies the law textually, but also executes
it in practice, thus benefiting the parties involved and society in general. The decision issued by the judge
constitutes law, which must maintain balance in society, so that the public regains complete trust in law
enforcement. In their legal deliberations, judges, using sound reasoning, can decide a case by determining when
the decision is closer to justice and when closer to legal certainty. Essentially, the principle of utility lies between
justice and legal certainty, with judges prioritizing the purpose or utility of the law in the public interest. The
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 9281
www.rsisinternational.org
emphasis on the principle of utility tends to be more economic. The underlying rationale is that law is for society
or the people; therefore, the purpose of life must be beneficial to humanity. (Amir Ilyas, 2016).
A judge's decision that reflects justice is not easy to find a benchmark for disputing parties. Because justice for
one party is not necessarily fair for the other. The judge's duty is to uphold justice in accordance with the irah-
irah written in the head of the decision, which states "For the Sake of Justice Based on Belief in the One Almighty
God." Justice in a judge's decision means impartiality toward either party in a case, recognizing the equal rights
and obligations of both parties. In issuing a decision, the judge must comply with existing regulations so that the
decision aligns with the justice desired by society. The winning party can demand or obtain what is rightfully
theirs, and the losing party must fulfill their obligations. In order to uphold justice, the judge's decision in court
must be in accordance with its true purpose: to provide equal opportunities for all parties in the case. The value
of justice can also be achieved when the case resolution process is carried out quickly, simply, and at low cost,
because delaying the resolution of a case is also a form of injustice.
A judge's decision, which reflects legal certainty in the case resolution process, plays a role in determining the
appropriate law. In rendering a decision, a judge must not only refer to the law, as the law may not clearly
regulate it. Therefore, the judge is required to explore legal values such as customary law and unwritten law that
exist within society. (Busyro Muqaddas, 2002). In such cases, the judge is obliged to explore and formulate these
findings in a decision. The judge's decision is part of the law enforcement process, one of the goals of which is
legal truth or the realization of legal certainty. The legal certainty outlined in the judge's decision is a product of
law enforcement based on legally relevant trial facts derived from the results of the case resolution process in
the trial. (Margono, 2012). The application of the law must be appropriate to the specific case, requiring judges
to consistently interpret the meaning of the laws and other regulations used as the basis for their decisions. The
application of the law must be consistent with the specific case, allowing judges to construct the case before
them comprehensively, wisely, and objectively. Judicial decisions that contain elements of legal certainty will
contribute to the development of legal knowledge. This is because a legally binding judicial decision is no longer
the judge's own opinion but rather the opinion of the court, which serves as a reference for the public.
Thus, an ideal civil court decision must fulfill these three principles. However, each judge's decision sometimes
places a particular emphasis on one dominant aspect. This does not mean the decision ignores other related
principles. It is clear that these three principles are closely interconnected, making the law a guideline for
behavior in every legal action. However, when these three principles are linked to reality, justice often clashes
with legal certainty, or legal certainty clashes with utility. (Dewi Atiqah, 2019).
Birth decisions The Supreme Court which became Supreme Court Jurisprudence No. 1/Yur/Arbt/2018 and No.
2/Yur/Arbt/2018 has show relevant results with hope namely existence consistency Supreme Court judge's
decision in case application cancellation decision arbitration. Therefore that, attitude consistency in decisions of
Supreme Court judges at the appellate and judicial levels review return will promote Power competition national
and convenience try as well as give certainty law specifically to the arbitration process as a forum for resolution
dispute business in Indonesia.
Closing
CONCLUSION
in study This is : 1. The legal remedy of "appeal" can be done only to decision district court that granted
application cancellation decision arbitration as intended in Article 70 of the Law Arbitration and APS, 2. The
Supreme Court's appeal decision does not can submitted effort law review back , because The Supreme Court
decided in level first and last and the Act Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution do not arrange whether
on appeal decision can submitted Review or no. 3. There is consistency decision Supreme Court in case
cancellation decision arbitration at the appellate and review levels return so that No Again cause confusion in
the future .
Suggestions, based on from results research obtained, aimed at for District Court that examines/adjudicates
application cancellation decision arbitration conventional national and Religious Courts that examine/adjudicate
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 9282
www.rsisinternational.org
application cancellation national sharia arbitration as well as future Supreme Court judges to remain maintain
and preserve consistency This Supreme Court is contained in Jurisprudence No. 1/Yur/Arbt /2018 and No.
2/Yur/Arbt /2018 in examine/judge application cancellation decision future arbitration, so that No repeating
Again confusion or inconsistencies that can impact Power competition national and convenience try as well as
give certainty law to the arbitration process as a forum for resolution dispute business in Indonesia.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Book
1. Ibrahim, Johnny. (2008) Theory and Methodology Normative Legal Research, Malang: Bayumedia
Publishing.
2. Ilyas, Amir. (2016) Collection of Legal Principles, Jakarta: Rajawali.
3. Kartasasmita, Agus Gurlaya. (2021) Legal Certainty in the Arbitration Process: As a Settlement Forum
Dispute Business in Indonesia, Depok: Rajawali Pers.
4. Margono. (2012) Principles of Justice, Benefits and Legal Certainty in Judge's Decision, Jakarta: Sinar
Grafika.
5. Soekanto, Soerjono. (2006) Introduction Legal Research, Jakarta: UI-Press.
Journal
1. Busyro Muqaddas. (2002). " Criticizing the Principles of Civil Procedure Law ", Ius Quia Lustum Law
Journal (Yogyakarta), p. 21.
2. Fence M. Wantu . (2013) “Obstacles to Judges in Creating Legal Certainty, Justice, and Benefit in the
Courts Civil Law”, Journal Pulpit Hukum, Vol. 25, Issue 2, pg. 206-217.
3. Yeni Widowaty and Fadia Fitriyanti. (2016) “Inconsistency Decision Supreme Court in Cancel Decision
Arbitration”, Jurnal Media Hukum, Vol. 23 Issue 2, pg. 211, DOI: 10.18196/jmh.2016.0081.209-217.
Laws, Regulations, Government Policies & Ma Decisions
1. Indonesia, S. (1999) Law No. 30 of 1999, concerning Arbitration and Alternatives Settlement Dispute
. Indonesia
2. Decision Tangerang District Court No: 224/ Pdt.Sus -Arb/2016/PN-Tng. dated May 24, 2016 in case
between PT. Angkasa Pura II (Persero) and PT. Ibad Amana Perkasa.
Internet Website
1. Atiqah, Dewi. (2019) The Role of Judges in Realizing the Principles of Justice, Legal Certainty and
Benefits Decision. Available at: https://pa-purwodadi.go.id/index.php/26-halaman-depan/artikel/358
(Accessed: October 15, 2023).
2. Directory of Decisions Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Available at:
https://putusan3.mahkamahagung.go.id/yurisprudensi/detail/11eae4f18f4c62509d3d313033343333.ht
ml (Accessed : October 15, 2023).
3. Directory of Decisions Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Available at:
https://putusan3.mahkamahagung.go.id/yurisprudensi/detail/11eae83f1b70c9e0b554313532373132.ht
ml (Accessed: October 15, 2023).
Thesis/Disertation
1. Rengganis (2022) Review Jurisdiction of Cancellation of Decision National Arbitration Based on
Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999 (Case Study) To A number of Decision Supreme Court of the Republic
of Indonesia.), Thesis: Postgraduate Program Faculty of Law, University of Indonesia.
