Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
2026 Hak Cipta Milik Hukumonline.com
Produk Pilihan
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Fathan Qorib, Andin Aditya Rahman
The Financial Services Authority (OJK) recently established an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) framework for disputes in the financial services sector by issuing Regulation No. 1/POJK.07/2014.
While the aim of the regulation is to make improvements to the financial services industry, certain provisions of the regulation are generating debate between academics and OJK officials, particularly those concerning the establishment of ADR institutions.
Under the new ADR regime, financial service providers are required to establish an ADR institution for their own sector in coordination with their respective associations. Questions have been raised whether such ADR institutions will be able to retain objectivity in handling disputes considering that they are formed by companies that are directly involved in disputed matters.
Erman Radjagukguk, professor of economic law at Universitas Indonesia, says that if the ADR institution is formed by the related companies, this will raise issues of conflicts of interest during dispute settlements.
“According to my understanding, associations should establish it, not the players. If it’s the players, they cannot be objective because the business people established it,” commented Erman.
Kusumaningtuti S. Setiono, member of the OJK’s Board of Commissioners, is dismissive of such concerns. According to her, the regulation requires the ADR institutions to implement principles of accessibility, independency, equity, efficiency and effectiveness. She also notes that the primary concern when establishing such ADR institutions in other countries is not necessarily independency and objectivity.
“Apparently they prioritize settling the dispute by themselves. This is aimed at retaining the loyalty of their customers, rather than objectivity,” said Kusumaningtuti.
(hot/kc)
The Financial Services Authority (OJK) recently established an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) framework for disputes in the financial services sector by issuing Regulation No. 1/POJK.07/2014.
While the aim of the regulation is to make improvements to the financial services industry, certain provisions of the regulation are generating debate between academics and OJK officials, particularly those concerning the establishment of ADR institutions.
Under the new ADR regime, financial service providers are required to establish an ADR institution for their own sector in coordination with their respective associations. Questions have been raised whether such ADR institutions will be able to retain objectivity in handling disputes considering that they are formed by companies that are directly involved in disputed matters.
Erman Radjagukguk, professor of economic law at Universitas Indonesia, says that if the ADR institution is formed by the related companies, this will raise issues of conflicts of interest during dispute settlements.
“According to my understanding, associations should establish it, not the players. If it’s the players, they cannot be objective because the business people established it,” commented Erman.
Kusumaningtuti S. Setiono, member of the OJK’s Board of Commissioners, is dismissive of such concerns. According to her, the regulation requires the ADR institutions to implement principles of accessibility, independency, equity, efficiency and effectiveness. She also notes that the primary concern when establishing such ADR institutions in other countries is not necessarily independency and objectivity.
“Apparently they prioritize settling the dispute by themselves. This is aimed at retaining the loyalty of their customers, rather than objectivity,” said Kusumaningtuti.
(hot/kc)
Fathan Qorib, Andin Aditya Rahman
The Financial Services Authority (OJK) recently established an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) framework for disputes in the financial services sector by issuing Regulation No. 1/POJK.07/2014.
While the aim of the regulation is to make improvements to the financial services industry, certain provisions of the regulation are generating debate between academics and OJK officials, particularly those concerning the establishment of ADR institutions.
Under the new ADR regime, financial service providers are required to establish an ADR institution for their own sector in coordination with their respective associations. Questions have been raised whether such ADR institutions will be able to retain objectivity in handling disputes considering that they are formed by companies that are directly involved in disputed matters.
Erman Radjagukguk, professor of economic law at Universitas Indonesia, says that if the ADR institution is formed by the related companies, this will raise issues of conflicts of interest during dispute settlements.
“According to my understanding, associations should establish it, not the players. If it’s the players, they cannot be objective because the business people established it,” commented Erman.
Kusumaningtuti S. Setiono, member of the OJK’s Board of Commissioners, is dismissive of such concerns. According to her, the regulation requires the ADR institutions to implement principles of accessibility, independency, equity, efficiency and effectiveness. She also notes that the primary concern when establishing such ADR institutions in other countries is not necessarily independency and objectivity.
“Apparently they prioritize settling the dispute by themselves. This is aimed at retaining the loyalty of their customers, rather than objectivity,” said Kusumaningtuti.
(hot/kc)
The Financial Services Authority (OJK) recently established an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) framework for disputes in the financial services sector by issuing Regulation No. 1/POJK.07/2014.
While the aim of the regulation is to make improvements to the financial services industry, certain provisions of the regulation are generating debate between academics and OJK officials, particularly those concerning the establishment of ADR institutions.
Under the new ADR regime, financial service providers are required to establish an ADR institution for their own sector in coordination with their respective associations. Questions have been raised whether such ADR institutions will be able to retain objectivity in handling disputes considering that they are formed by companies that are directly involved in disputed matters.
Erman Radjagukguk, professor of economic law at Universitas Indonesia, says that if the ADR institution is formed by the related companies, this will raise issues of conflicts of interest during dispute settlements.
“According to my understanding, associations should establish it, not the players. If it’s the players, they cannot be objective because the business people established it,” commented Erman.
Kusumaningtuti S. Setiono, member of the OJK’s Board of Commissioners, is dismissive of such concerns. According to her, the regulation requires the ADR institutions to implement principles of accessibility, independency, equity, efficiency and effectiveness. She also notes that the primary concern when establishing such ADR institutions in other countries is not necessarily independency and objectivity.
“Apparently they prioritize settling the dispute by themselves. This is aimed at retaining the loyalty of their customers, rather than objectivity,” said Kusumaningtuti.
(hot/kc)