PhD defence P.P. (Priskila) Penasthika

Dissertation in short:

Despite the paramount role of choice of law in international contractual relationships, its implementation in various countries remains disparate. Many countries have acknowledged and given effect to choice of law, but some other countries persist in opposing it. The lingering reluctance in enforcing choice of law remains a challenging impediment to cross-border commercial relationships.

Strict adherence to the territoriality principle, absence of special provisions or clear guidelines of choice of law, and difficulties in confirming the content of the chosen foreign law are among the reasons for the reluctance to give effect to choice of law. These circumstances are encountered by some countries, including Indonesia. 

This research not only unravels the reasons for Indonesia’s reluctance and its subsequent lack of advancement on choice of law, but also examines possible solutions to the problem. To this end, this research relies on doctrinal research, supported by qualitative research in the form of interviews. The doctrinal method made it possible to explore and describe the theoretical and regulatory frameworks of choice of law that are available at the global, regional, and national levels. Meanwhile, the interviews contributed to a better understanding of the problems and difficulties facing the Indonesian judicial practice with regard to choice of law. Accordingly, this research will serve as an essential point of reference for academics, practitioners, and policymakers interested in private international law and cross-border commercial litigation.