Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • 14 - The Industrial Relations Court

  • from Part IV - Courts and Rights
  • Edited by Melissa Crouch, University of New South Wales, Sydney
  • Book:
    The Politics of Court Reform
    Published online:
    30 August 2019
    Print publication:
    19 September 2019, pp 311-333

  • Summary

    In 2004, Indonesia’s Industrial Relations Court was established as a special court within the scope of the general courts. It has seen major challenges to its operations from the beginning. These challenges include ongoing internal problems related to the high levels of corruption within the Indonesian judicial system; the problems related to technical competence and legal integrity of career judges, ad hoc judges and registrars; and external problems including the workers’ lack of competence in civil litigation procedures and thus access to the court’s litigation processes. Together these problems have led to declining public confidence in the performance of the Court; a situation which has a greater adverse effect on employees and trade unions than on employers. The Court needs to be reformed, for example, by turning it into an autonomous special court, a recommendation that has been put forward by several ad hoc judges from union circles. Such progressive reforms, however, would require strong political commitment both from the judiciary and government; both of which appear currently to be mired in the past.