The Comparative of Arbitration Performance and Public Court on Settlement of Civil Disputes in Indonesia

The purpose of this study is to describe the comparison of dispute resolution mechanisms by arbitration and dispute resolution through general courts. This study uses normative juridical, referring to legal norms which include laws and regulations, court decisions and applicable legal rules. Furthermore, this research will answer legal issues regarding dispute resolution through arbitration. Normative legal research is "legal research conducted by examining literature (secondary data). The results of the study indicate that there are two choices of arbitral institutions to resolve disputes, namely arbitration and general courts. Comparison of dispute resolution mechanisms between arbitration and institutional arbitration is that arbitration has the freedom of the parties to determine the arbitrator, guarantees the confidentiality of the parties because dispute resolution is carried out in private, the parties can determine the place of arbitration, choice of law in dispute resolution, and the dispute resolution process is faster, namely can be completed in no more than 180 days. While settlement through a general court requires a relatively long time, is open to the public, and is confrontational in nature, all decisions are final and binding. However, for arbitration, the recognition and implementation of the decision must still be registered with the district court. Weaknesses of arbitration are the emergence of suspicion of each party about the closeness of the arbitrator, given the current sophistication of technology, so that the number of dispute resolution through arbitration in Indonesia is very small. Society prefers litigation over non-litigation.