Tantangan Penyelesaian Sengketa Internasional melalui Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS): Studi terhadap Posisi Indonesia dalam Melindungi Kepentingan Umum

Fiant Lintang

doi:10.28932/di.v17i2.12166

Authors

Fiant Lintang Universitas Gadjah Mada

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.28932/di.v17i2.12166

Keywords:

ISDS, investment law, social justice, regulatory sovereignty, legal reform, Indonesia

Abstract

This study examines the structural challenges arising from the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism and its impact on a country’s ability, particularly Indonesia, to protect the public interests. In practice, ISDS often positions the state in a subordinate role, where policies designed to safeguard societal rights, environmental protection, and public health become targets of foreign investor claims. The study aims to analyze structural imbalances within ISDS, assess their effects on Indonesia’s regulatory sovereignty, and explore strategies for reforming investment law to balance investor protection with public interest. The research employs a normative juridical approach, analyzing bilateral and multilateral investment agreements, arbitral decisions, and relevant national policies. The findings of this study indicate that the dominance of the investor-centric paradigm in ISDS weakens the capacity of developing states to formulate progressive public policies. Therefore, Indonesia needs to restructure its investment law instruments by emphasizing social justice, transparency, and sustainability, without diminishing legal certainty for investors. The results of this research are expected to contribute to the formulation of an investment law framework that is fair, democratic, and aligned with sustainable development.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Journals

Apriyanti, E. K. (2025). Pergeseran paradigma hukum investasi internasional: Menyeimbangkan perlindungan Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) dengan kedaulatan regulasi negara dalam konteks reformasi perjanjian Indonesia pasca-BIT. Media Hukum Indonesia, 3(4), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17424649. p. 4.

Arina, C. N. (2022). Logical consequences in Indonesia's position in investment disputes in arbitration forum ICSID. Indonesian Law Journal, 15(1).

Arcuri, A., & Montanaro, F. (2018). Justice for all: Protecting the public interest in investment treaties. Boston College Law Review, 59(8), 2791. Atanasova, D., Beyer, V., & Ostransky, J. (2024, September). Compensation and damages in investor-state dispute settlement: Options for reform. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org

Boué, J. C. (2024). ‘Lying with numbers’ in international arbitration against states. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 15(1), 5–34. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idae007

Christian, J. P. (2025). Tinjauan kritis sistem penyelesaian sengketa investasi internasional dan dampaknya terhadap kepentingan nasional Indonesia. Causa: Jurnal Hukum dan Kewarganegaraan, 13(3), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.6679/p1ezvf02

Elsa Rahmawati. (2023). Penyelesaian Sengketa Penanaman Modal Asing (Studi Kasus Sengketa Churchill Mining plc dan Planet Mining pty ltd Melawan Indonesia). Jurnal panah keadilan, 2(2), 28-37. https://doi.org/10.57094/jpk.v2i2.906. Dikutip pada hlm. 35.

Fach Gómez, K., & Titi, C. (2023). Facilitating access to investor-state dispute settlement for small and medium-sized enterprises: Tracing the path forward. European Business Law Review, 34(7). Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4323775. P. 4.

García Sánchez, G. J. (2024). Defrosting regulatory chill. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, 45(3), 597–654. https://doi.org/10.58112/jil.45-3.2

Grant, T. D., & Kieff, F. S. (2022). Appointing arbitrators: Tenure, public confidence, and a middle road for ISDS reform. Michigan Journal of International Law, 43, 171. Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol43/iss1/5. https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.43.1.appointing

Huikuri, T. A. (2023). Constraints and incentives in the investment regime: How bargaining power shapes BIT reform. Review of International Organizations, 18(2), 361–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-022-09473-1

Johnson, Lise, Lisa E. Sachs, and Jeffrey D. Sachs. Investor-State Dispute Settlement, Public Interest and U.S. Domestic Law. 2015. Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment. https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/sustainable_investment_staffpubs/22.

JILLANI, M. A. H., GHOURI, A. A., & WU, X. (2025). Institutional Design for an Appellate Mechanism in Investor-State Dispute Settlement. Asian Journal of International Law, 15(2), 325–355. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2044251325000098

Junaidi, J. (2024). IMPLIKASI PERLINDUNGAN INVESTOR ASING DALAM ARBITRASE INTERNASIONAL TERHADAP KEDAULATAN NEGARA: STUDI KASUS CHURCIL MINING. Kultura: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Sosial, Dan Humaniora, 2(10), 872–884. https://doi.org/10.572349/kultura.v2i10.3960

Krzysztof Pelc, Does the International Investment Regime Induce Frivolous Litigation?, SSRN, 10 May 2016, https://ssrn.com/abstract=2778056. Lubis, Devi Triana. (2022). “Analisa Putusan ICSID Atas Sengketa Churchill Mining Plc, Planet Mining Dengan Pemerintah Indonesia Berdasarkan Prinsip Unidroit”. Jurnal Hukum Universitas Trisakti. Vol.1, No.1, Hal. 31.

Langford, M., Potestà, M., Kaufmann-Kohler, G., & Behn, D. (2020). Special Issue: UNCITRAL and Investment Arbitration Reform: Matching Concerns and Solutions: An Introduction. The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 21(2-3), 167-187. https://doi.org/10.1163/22119000-12340171

Langford, M., Behn, D., & Lie, R. H. (2017). The revolving door in international investment arbitration. Journal of International Economic Law, 20(2), 301–332. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgx018

Pahala Christian, J. (2025). Tinjauan kritis sistem penyelesaian sengketa investasi internasional dan dampaknya terhadap kepentingan nasional Indonesia. CAUSA: Jurnal Hukum dan Kewarganegaraan, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.3783/causa.v2i9.2461

Purnamasari, I. A. G. W. (2020). Kekuatan mengikat keputusan arbitrase ICSID dalam penyelesaian sengketa penanaman modal. Acta Comitas: Jurnal Hukum Kenotariatan, 5(2), 401–410. https://doi.org/10.24843/AC.2020.v05.i02.p16

Potestà, M., & Kaufmann-Kohler, G. (2016). Can the Mauritius Convention serve as a model for the reform of investor–state arbitration in connection with the introduction of a permanent investment tribunal or an appeal mechanism? – Analysis and roadmap. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3455511

Roberts, A. (2018). Incremental, Systemic, and Paradigmatic Reform of Investor-State Arbitration. American Journal of International Law, 112(3), 410–432. https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2018.69

Rocha, M., Brauch, M. D., & Mebratu-Tsegaye, T. (2021, November). Advocates say ISDS is necessary because domestic courts are “inadequate,” but claims and decisions don’t reveal systemic failings. Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment. https://ccsi.columbia.edu/publications/advocates-say-isds-necessary-because-domestic-courts-are-inadequate-claims-and-decisions-dont-reveal-systemic-failings

Roshana Putri, R. (2019). INDONESIA’S NEW MODEL OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY: COMPARISON WITH BRAZIL. Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, 3(2), 235-254. hlm 105-106 https://doi.org/10.23920/pjil.v3i2.314

Siallagan, S. P., Wiwoho, J., Suryono, A., & Kurniawan, I. D. (2024). Reorienting investment dispute resolution in Indonesia: Towards a fair and efficient system. Journal of Law and Legal Reform, 5(3), 1155-1184. https://doi.org/10.15294/jllr.v5i3.4367.

Sardinha, E. (2017). The impetus for the creation of an appellate mechanism. ICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal, 32(3), 503–527. https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/six016

Stähler, F. (2023). An optimal investor-state dispute settlement mechanism. Journal of Economics, 138, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00712-022-00800-z

Tang, Y., Guo, Q. (2025). The Return of the State and the Reform of the International Investment Dispute Settlement Mechanism: Reasons and Reflections. International Journal of Law and Society, 8(3), 140-151. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20250803.11. p. 142-143.

Triefus, S. (2023). The UNGPs and ISDS: Should businesses assess the human rights impacts of investor–state arbitration? Business and Human Rights Journal, 8(2), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2023.45 . p. 331.

Weghmann, V., & Hall, D. (2021). The unsustainable political economy of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 87(3), 501-518. p. 304. https://doi.org/10.3917/risa.873.050

Conference Paper

Fabry, Elvire, and Giorgio Garbasso. “ISDS in the TTIP: The Devil Is in the Details.” Policy Paper, Notre Europe – Jacques Delors Institute, 2015, p. 4.