Penulisan ini mengeksplorasi kasus antara Mr. Ang Choon Beng@Ang Siong Kiat dengan PT MNC dan afiliasinya yang berhasil membuat Putusan Arbitrase SIAC No. 139/2011 dan No. 53/2013 menjadi tidak dapat dieksekusi di Indonesia dengan alasan Put and Call Option Agreement sebagai perjanjian pokok yang mengikat para pihak dibatalkan melalui Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Barat No. 766/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Jkt.Brt, dimana gugatan pembatalan perjanjian tersebut diajukan secara internal oleh PT Global Mediacom Tbk selaku pemegang saham mayoritas PT MNC. Analisis kasus ini menunjukkan masih adanya praktik dalam peradilan di Indonesia dimana pihak Indonesia yang dikalahkan dalam proses arbitrase di luar negeri memanfaatkan kelemahan instrumen hukum dan hukum acara yang bertele-tele di Indonesia sehingga memberikan celah baginya untuk menunda atau bahkan membuat Putusan Arbitrase Internasional tersebut tidak dapat dieksekusi. Ironisnya, meskipun penyelesaian melalui arbitrase telah menjadi opsi yang paling diminati oleh kaum pebisnis sebagai forum penyelesaian sengketa untuk transaksi bisnis internasional mereka, namun campur tangan pengadilan dalam proses eksekusi suatu putusan arbitrase di Indonesia sebagai langkah terpenting justru menjadi batu sandungan yang memberikan ketidakpastian hukum. Inilah yang mengakibatkan Indonesia dikenal sebagai ‘unfriendly arbitration state’ dalam dunia internasional. Pentingnya penegakkan asas iktikad baik dalam berarbitrase dan amandemen UU No. 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa menjadi krusial agar dapat memberikan kepastian hukum bagi para pihak dalam berarbitrase.

---

This writing explores the case between Mr. Ang Choon Beng@Ang Siong Kiat with PT MNC and its affiliates who succeeded in making SIAC Arbitration Award No. 139/2011 and No. 53/2013 became non-executable in Indonesia on the grounds that the Put and Call Option Agreement as the main agreement that binds the parties was annulled through Decision of the West Jakarta District Court No. 766/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Jkt.Brt, where the lawsuit for canceling the agreement was filed internally by PT Global Mediacom Tbk as the majority shareholder of PT MNC. The analysis of this case shows that there are still practices in Indonesian courts where the Indonesian party who was defeated in the arbitration process abroad takes advantage of the weaknesses of legal instruments and procedural law which are lengthy in Indonesia to provide a loophole for them to postpone or even make the International Arbitration Award non-executable. Ironically, even though settlement through arbitration has become the most popular option for business people as a dispute resolution forum for their international business transactions, court intervention in the process of executing an arbitral award in Indonesia as the most important step actually becomes a stumbling block that creates legal uncertainty. This is what has resulted in Indonesia being known as an 'unfriendly arbitration state' in the international world. The importance of upholding the principle of good faith in arbitration and amendments to Law No. 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution is crucial in order to provide legal certainty for the parties to arbitrate.