{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01083743842364532, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.0476190476190474, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Judicial Review of International Arbitral Awards on the Public Policy Exception in Indonesia

The principle of non-review of arbitral awards on the merits is of foundational importance to the finality and enforceability of foreign awards. This paper examines the nature and scope of judicial review of international awards based on the public policy exception by the Indonesian courts. This article argues that the courts review the material findings of facts of the award expansively, relying on the public policy exception. It indicates that the courts do not only review errors in findings of fact, but they also engage in a full and independent re-examination of the factual basis that allegedly gives rise to the public policy violation. In the latter part of this article, the author concludes that the broad scope and meaning ascribed to the public policy exception under the Indonesian Arbitration law and the court's expansive intervention are likely to inhibit the finality of foreign awards in Indonesia.