LIST OF QUESTIONS

1	Infrastructure Regulation
Question (Rajah & Tann) : What are the market entry requirements for a broadband telecommunication operator?   
Answer (ICT Watch) : According to our finding, based on Telecommunications Law No. 36/1999, Telecommunications Operation Governmental Regulation No. 52/2000, Operation of Telecommunications Services Ministerial Decree No. KM 21/2001 and Operation of Telecommunications Networks Ministerial Decree No. KM 20/2001, there are no special categorizations for broadband telecommunication operators. A general provision applies for licensing purposes, where any operator should obtain a license from the Government of Indonesia (i.e General Directorate of Post and Telecommunication).  The operator shall be a legal entity, whether in the form of State Owned Enterprise, Local Government Owned Enterprise, Private or Public Company as well as Koperasi (Cooperatives).
It should, however, be emphasized that there is a difference or separation between license for Telecommunication Network Provider and Telecommunication Service Provider, although a company may at the same time possess those two licenses such as PT Telkom Tbk, PT Indosat Tbk, etc.
Under Article 4 - 5 of Operation of Telecommunications Services Ministerial Decree No. KM 21/2001, there is a restriction to the amount of operators by the Government i.e. Minister of Communication for telecommunication operators which utilize certain radio frequency spectrum allocation and or network access code. For this kind of operators, the license for telecommunication operator shall be granted through a selection process.
For telecommunication operators not utilizing certain radio frequency spectrum allocation and or network access code, however, the amount is not limited and the license is granted after an evaluation.

Could you, please, specify whether the Indonesian Telecommunications Regulatory Body (known as “BRTI”) has commenced its operations?
We have verified that the Indonesian Telecommunications Regulatory Body has started its duties. One among the results is its recommendation on the increase of fixed telephone fee in the beginning of April 2004. Besides, BRTI also is formulating several regulations related to the duopoly of Telkom-Indosat, provisions on interconnection and several other regulations.
Could you, please, specify whether BRTI has taken over all or any of the powers originally vested into the Ministry of Communication and Information and the Director General of Posts and Telecommunications? 
BRTI assumes a delegative authority from the Minister of Communication including the functions of regulating, monitoring, and controlling (Article 5 KM No. 31 Year 2003). The duties of BRTI as stipulated in Article 6 KM No. 31 Year 2003) among others; 
a.	Regulation, including the formulation and stipulation of provisions on implementations of telecommunication networks and telecommunication services, as follows:
1)	licenses for telecommunication network providing and telecommunication services providing;
2)	operation performance standard;
3)	service quality standard;
4)	interconnection fee;
5)	telecommunication device and facility standard;
b.	Monitoring to implementations of telecommunication networks and telecommunication services, as follows:
1)	operation performance;
2)	business competition;
3)	telecommunication device and facility utilization;
c.	Controlling to implementations of telecommunication networks and telecommunication services, as follows:
1)	settlement to disputes among telecommunication network providers and telecommunication service providers;
2)	telecommunication device and facility utilization;
3)	implementation of service quality standard.
We should, however, emphasize that, due to the structure of BRTI that is composed and assigned by the Minister of Communication and the hierarchy of regulations in Indonesia, any decision made by BRTI shall be enacted in the form of the Decree of the General Directorate for Post and Telecommunication.  This, in our point of view, is the weak point of the structure of BRTI according to Indonesian law.
Could you, please specify the composition of BRTI? 
Based on KM No. 31 Year 2003, BRTI is a fusion of the General Directorate of Post and Telecommunication and the Committee for Telecommunication Regulation, with a collegial structure of members, as follows;
Chairman	:	Djamhari Sirat, General Director of Post and Telecommunication, Department of Communication, also an expert in telecommunication and informatics 
Members  	:  Koesmarihati
                  		Soetjipto
                  		Hery Nugroho
                  		Suryadi Azis
Could you, please, specify whether is the mechanism for the appointment/removal of BRTI (its members) independent from the government?

KM No. 31 Year 2003 indeed points out that in carrying out its duties BRTI shall be free from any influences of power or interests of other parties (Article 7 KM No. 31 Year 2003).  Nonetheless, we argue that the stipulation does not automatically cause BRTI to be independent from the Government, considering that:
a)	BRTI’s structure of membership and their assignments is ruled by the Minister of Communication through a mechanism and selection procedures that is carried out within the Department of Communication themselves. This in fact causes BRTI’s level of independence to fall far beyond other institutions such as Bank Indonesia, Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (KPPU), Komisi Penyiaran Indonesia (KPI) and other institutions whose establishments are directly ruled by Laws and their members are appointed through a harsh selection with a fit and proper test mechanism while also involving the DPR.
b)	BRTI is a fusion of the General Directorate of Post and Telecommunication and the Committee for Telecommunication Regulation. It should be understood that the General Directorate of Post and Telecommunication is a part of the Department of Communication and is structurally within the Department of Communication.
c)	Under Article 8 KM No. 31 Tahun 2003, any decision of BRTI shall be enacted in the form of the Decree of the General Directorate of Post and Telecommunication. This is necessary for the decisions to have a more extensive binding power to the telecommunication industry.
Could you, please, provide us with an English version of Decree No. KM 31/2003 providing for the establishment of BRTI?
Please find the Attachment.
We have established that the telecommunications sector is opened to foreign investments through a join venture arrangement where the Indonesian partner’s shares in a joint venture company must be at least five percent (5%) of the total paid-up capital of the company. Could you, please, confirm this finding?
We confirm your finding. According to Presidential Decree No. 118/2000 Concerning On The Amendment To Presidential Decree No. 96/2000 On Business Fields Closed And Open To Investments On Centain Conditions, and in conjunction  with Article 6 of Government Regulation No. 20/1994  Concerning On Investment, the Indonesia partner’s share in a joint venture company must be at least five percent.
2	internet content regulation
Does Indonesia have an Internet content regulator? If yes, could you, please, specify its identity?

There are no Government policies concerning any regulator or regulatory body specifically performs the functions of regulating the contents of the Internet. Nevertheless, the function is performed by agencies or institutions related to content-providing for certain subjects. For examples, a news website shall be in compliance to provisions stipulated in the Law on Press. Whenever there is a breach to the provisions, Dewan Pers as the relevant institution shall decide on the breach. 
For your information, five years ago the Government has dismissed the Department of Information Dissemination whose duty, among others, is to regulate and provide directives for activities related to dissemination of information including, but not limited to radio and television broadcasting, and printed media. There are no governmental bodies ever since specifically deal with the issues of information dissemination. 
In 1998, the Government establishes a new ministry to replace the Department of Information Dissemination i.e. the State Ministry for Communication and Information. The ministry, however, does not have the authority to regulate activities related to broadcasting and information dissemination. 
If the Internet content regulator as specified in section 2.1 above exists in Indonesia, could you, please specify whether is such regulator a legal entity separated from the government?
If the Internet content regulator as specified in section 2.1 above exists in Indonesia, could you, please specify the mechanism for the appointment/removal of such regulator (its members)?
If the Internet content regulator as specified in section 2.1 above exists in Indonesia, could you, please, specify whether is a provider of Internet content required to secure a license from such regulator?
Does Indonesia have any law (legislation and/or a judicial decision) classifying the Internet as a kind of broadcasting media? If yes, could you, please, provide us with an English version of such legislation or a judicial/official decision?
We observe that, according to Indonesian law, it is the regulation in the field of telecommunication alone which explicitly assert that Internet is a form of telecommunication in Indonesia. 
Broadcasting Law (Law No. 32 Year 2003 on Broadcasting) does not explicitly mention that Internet is one among broadcasting media. We agree to your interpretation of the notion ‘broadcasting”, that Internet may be included as a broadcasting media. Moreover, the Elucidation of the Law No. 32 Year 2003 mentioned above indeed indicates that the Internet is a specific form in the operation of broadcast.
If the Internet classifies as a kind of broadcasting media, does the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission actually exercise the control over the Internet content in its capacity to control the media? If yes, could you, please, provide as with an example of such regulatory intervention?
To our best knowledge, Indonesian Broadcasting Commission until recent has not yet engaged in any regulation, control, nor intervention in any kind to internet content.
Could you, please, specify whether the mechanism for the appointment/removal of the Central Indonesian Broadcasting Commission’s members is independent from the government?
We should say that the election process of KPI (Central Indonesian Broadcasting Commission) members is adequately independent from the Government. The mechanism is open, carried out through several screening stages including fit and proper test by the DPR. Here, the President as the head of the State functions only to endorse candidate members which has been selected and recommended by the DPR.
3	e-commerce
Could you, please, specify the legislative status of the draft bill on “Electronic Information and Transactions” (the “E-com Bill”)?
To the best of our knowledge, the Government of Indonesia has already carried out the finalization of the Bill to the phase of a joint team consist of several governmental bodies. The Bill, nevertheless, has not yet been submitted to the DPR for further discussion.
Could you, please, specify whether the E-com Bill generally covers all or any of the areas listed in sections 3.2.1 - 3.2.4 below.
3.1.1	E-documents/e-messages/e-contracts    
3.1.2	E-signatures  
3.1.3	Admissibility of e-documents/e-messages/e-signatures in legal proceedings  
3.1.4	Regulation of certification authorities  

Note 
 Generally covers the subject 

Could you, please, provide us with an English version of the E-com Bill?
Please find the Attachment
We have established that currently there is no law specifically addressing indicators listed in sections 3.5.1 - 3.5.11 below. Could you, please confirm this finding?
Currently, there is no specific law regarding the legal recognition of electronic documents.
Is there any other legislation/judicial decision addressing any of the indicators specified below in sections 3.5.1 - 3.5.11? If yes, could you, please, also provide us with an English version of such legislation or a judicial decision?
3.1.5	Legal recognition of e-documents
3.1.6	Varying levels of legal recognition of e-documents
3.1.7	Satisfaction of writing requirement by an electronic equivalent
3.1.8	Legal recognition of electronic contracts
3.1.9	Cross border recognition of electronic contracts
3.1.10	Expression of intention by e-message/e-document
3.1.11	Attribution of e-message/e-document
3.1.12	Rules governing timing of dispatch/receipt
3.1.13	Acknowledgement of receipt
3.1.14	Recognition of an electronic agent
3.1.15	Retention of e-message/e-document in place of physical documents

4	E-signature
We have established that currently there is no law specifically addressing the indicators listed in sections 4.1.1 - 4.1.9 below. Could you, please confirm this finding?
Currently, there is no specific law in Indonesia regarding e-signatures and certification authorities.
4.1.1	Distinction between types of e-signatures
4.1.2	Legal recognition of e-signature
4.1.3	Satisfaction of signing requirement by an electronic equivalent (e-signature)
4.1.4	Admissibility of e-signatures in evidence
4.1.5	Cross border recognition of e-signatures
4.1.6	National interoperability of e-signatures
4.1.7	International interoperability of e-signatures
4.1.8	Regulation of certification authorities 
4.1.9	Recognition of foreign certification authorities
Is there any other legislation/judicial decision addressing any of the indicators specified above in sections 4.1.1- 4.1.9 above? If yes, could you, please, also provide us with an English version of such legislation or a judicial decision?
No, there is not any.
Is there a certification authority in Indonesia? If yes, could you, please, specify its identity?
Yes, there are at least two certification authorities (CA) in Indonesia. PT Telkom Tbk, with the B2B Division operates i-Trust (http://www.i-trustonline.com) which is a private CA. Besides, PT Indosat Tbk also operates a CA under the name of Indosign. Nonetheless, the business sustainability of these two Cas is unknown. 
Is a certification authority identified in section 4.3 above a legal entity separated from the Indonesian government?
Yes. Both of them are private-owned company. Government’s need of e-signature/public key infrastructure is tackled by Badan Sandi Negara (State Code Agency).
Can you describe the mechanism adopted for the appointment/removal of a certification authority (or its members) identified in section 4.3 above? Is such mechanism independent from the government?
There is no regulation on this matter in Indonesia

5	electronic evidence
Could you, please, specify whether there is a law (legislation/court rules/judicial decision) addressing any of the matters specified below in sections 5.1.1 - 5.1.3?  If yes, could you, please, also provide us with an English version of such law (legislation/court rules/judicial decision)? 
5.1.1	Admissibility of e-documents in legal proceedings

Recognition to e-documents in legal examination by the court so far has not yet included activities related to e-commerce. There is, however, the Law No. 8 Year 1997 with its implementation in the Government Regulation No. 88 Year 1999 that regulates the procedure to transform documents. This, in effect, makes electronic documents still not yet accepted by the court should there be infringements and or crimes related to e-commerce. 
There are indeed several legal provisions recognized electronic documents, but hitherto they are limited only to corruption, money laundering, and terrorism. These, moreover, still needs implementing regulations for e-documents to be submitted in these special cases.
5.1.2	Preservation of e-documents for admission as evidence in legal proceedings
                    No, there is not any.
5.1.3	Discovery and protection of e-documents in legal proceeding
                  No, there is not any.

6	privacy/data protection
Could you, please, specify if there is any legislation that specifically addresses privacy/data protection issues such as collection, use, storage and protection of data?  
There is no legislation in this topic
If the legislation specified in section 6.1 above exists in Indonesia, could you, please, specify whether a data protection regime established in such legislation operates on an opt-in basis? 
If the legislation specified in section 6.1 above exists in Indonesia, could you, please, specify whether a data protection regime established in such legislation provides for surveillance of data contained in computer systems? 
Is there a regulator that deals with data protection/privacy issues in Indonesia? If yes, could you, please, specify its identity?
         No, there is not any.
Is the data protection regulator identified in section 6.4 above a legal entity separated from the Indonesian government?

                   There in no regulator in this matter 
Can you describe the mechanism adopted for the appointment and removal of the data protection regulator (or its members) identified in section 6.4 above? 
        No, there is not any.

Does Indonesia have a dispute resolution mechanism established specifically for resolving disputes or grievances relating to breaches of privacy and/or data protection principles?

                    There in no institution in Indonesia have competency to resolving disputes relating to breaches of privacy/data protection

7	consumer protection
We have established that there is no legislation specifically addressing the subject of consumer protection in the electronic environment. Could you, please, confirm our finding?
Yes, we confirm your finding. Just as other legal provisions in Indonesia, provisions on consumer protection in Indonesia do not specifically rule over protection in e-commerce transactions.
Could you, please specify whether there is a judicial/official decision addressing the applicability of the Law Concerning Consumers Protection No. 8/1999 in electronic environment? 
To the best of our knowledge, there are no judicial decisions related to the application of the Law on Consumers Protection No. 8/1999 in electronic environments.
Is there any law (legislation/judicial decision) advocating that all e-commerce relating marketing practices in Indonesia must be fair and honest?
There is none of it.
We have established that there is no dispute resolution mechanism established specifically for the resolution of disputes relating to consumer protection in the electronic environment. Could you, please, confirm our finding? 
Yes, we confirm your finding. We don’t have spesific institution for resolution of disputes on electronic environment cases.  
8	domain name
We have established that IDNIC is the only administrator and registrar of domain names under .id. Could you, please, confirm our finding?  
Yes, IdNIC (Indonesia Network Information Centre –  www.idnic.net.id ) is an institution performing the function of registering domain name with country-code Top Level Domain (ccTLD) .id in Indonesia. The registration process of the domain name .id is carried out using web-based online forms or via e-mail, thus sent to concerning providers of Second Level Domain (SLD), such as co.id, or.id, ac.id, web.id, mil.id, sch.id, go.id and net.id. Because IdNIC is not yet a registered legal entity in Indonesia, for billing and registration fee administration purposes, IdNIC cooperates with Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia (Indonesia ISP’s Association). The cooperation takes the form of revenue sharing.
Could you, please, specify whether there is a mechanism established specifically for resolving domain name disputes in Indonesia? 
For TLD (Top Level Domain) and ccTLD .ID, Indonesia does not have any specific regulation to settle domain name disputes. The landmark case for TLD is www.mustika-ratu.com, which processed through criminal procedures whereas the accused found guilty by the Supreme Court.
For ccTLD purpose, up until now there are no cases relaetd to it (zero case). There is an indication that this condition is due to the registration process for ccTLD .ID in Indonesia employs considerably strict requirements.
For SLD web.id and or.id, applicants may apply on behalf of themselves with their personal names and shall be eligible to attach only a copy of their ID Cards (KTP).
For SLD co.id, applicants should be companies and should accompany their application with copies of NPWP and SIUP
For SLD go.id (government instances), ac.id (education institutes D1 in minimum or course institutes), sch.id (education institutes of a high school level or lower), mil.id (military instances), applicants should apply on behalf of their concerning institutions by attaching a copy of official recommendation letter from the institutions.
For SLD net.id, applicants are limited only to companies in the field of telecommunication networks and or Internet, should aply on behalf their company while accompany their application with a copy of official recommendation letter from a relevant institution such as General Directorate of Post and Telecommunication.
Basically, IdNIC employs a first-come-first-serve method. However, if the domain name requested is the same with or similar to a certain renowned trade mark, IdNIC adminstrator shall require the applicant to accompany his document requirements with a letter of confirmation from the Department of Justice and Human Rights confirming his ownership of the trade mark. IdNIC administrator will also hold an open discussion to ask for inputs from Indonesian Internet communities should there be hesitation in the part of IdNIC to take measures related to domain name disputes. The open discussion is hosted by a mailing-list idnic@rs.net.id. IdNIC does not allow any domain name requested should it contain elements of pornography, racial, religious, intercircle, and or ethnic hatred, (SARA) as well as certain geographical names such as city, province, or state names.
Could you, please specify whether Indonesia agreed to adhere to the Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy (“UDRP”)?
IdNIC Administrator has already had a standard rules, as is explained above, to minimalize domain name disputes. The combination of first-come-first-serve method and a harsh administrative requirements, as well as inputs from internet communities where necessary, is proven to be effective to prevent domain name disputes. Therefore, .ID domain name disputes do not involve international domain name dispute resolution such as UDRP (www.icann.org/udrp). IdNIC is not responsible either for registration and disputes of domain name outside .ID, e.g. generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) .com, .net, .org, etc.

9	intellectual property
We have established that the Trade Mark Law No. 15/2001 does not expressly extend to the online environment. Could you, please, confirm our finding? 
Yes, we confirm your finding. There are some lawyers, however, who argues that the substance of Trade Mark Law No. 15/2001 can be applied to online cases.
Is there any judicial/official decision addressing the applicability of the Trade Mark Law No. 15/2001 in the online environment?
There is no judicial/official decision addressing in the online environment

Does Indonesia have any other legislation/judicial decision expressly addressing the trademark protection in the online environment? 
There is no judicial/official decision addressing the trade mark protection in the online environment

Does Indonesia have a dispute resolution mechanism established specifically for resolving disputes relating to the online infringement of trademark rights, copyrights and/or database rights?  

There in no institution in Indonesia have competency to resolving disputes relating to online infringement of trademark rights, copyrights and/or data base rights. To the best of our knowledge, if any cases relating to infringement trademark rights, copyrights and/or data base rights we have mechanism in Commercial Court to resolve the dispute.

10	e-banking/e-finance
Is there any law (legislation/judicial decision/regulatory instrument issued by the Central Bank of the Republic of Indonesia) governing the provision of e-banking and/or e-finance services on the Internet in Indonesia? If yes, could please, provide us with an English version of such law (legislation/judicial decision/regulatory instrument issued by the Central Bank of the Republic of Indonesia)? 
Yes there is Circular Letter of Central Bank on this matter. Please find the Attachment
Is the mechanism for the appointment/removal of the Governor and the Senior Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Indonesia independent from the government? 

Since the enactment of the Law No. 23 Year 1999 on Central Bank nullifying the Law No. 13 Year 1968 on Central Bank, it is explicitly stated that the main duty of (BI) is no longer assisting the Government. Conceptually, this aspect suits the expectation that BI should be independent, autonomous, and has an unquestionable right to draw its policies.
In addition, Elucidation of the Law No. 23/1999 also assert that in order to support its duties, central bank should be allowed to perform necessary banking activities. This context shows that albeit carrying out its conventional duties, BI shall also be eligible to perform other activities of a micro nature, such as opening L/C for several institutions. This in fact has fail BI’s principle of independence, because this kind of activities is not only likely to cause a conflict of interest, but also reducing business opportunities for commercial banks. Despite doing it itself, BI should better pass on the activities to government-owned commercial banks, so that BI can concentrate on its main duty to preserve monetary stability.       
It can be concluded from the above exposition that as an institution BI is in nature not a part of the Government. In other words, BI is separated from the Government, but in performing its duties, any measures taken by BI should be based on and in line with Government policies. >From this, it will not be completely wrong to say that BI is not independent. 
The selection, assignment, and dismissal of the Governor of BI are indeed conducted through a reasonably tough selection mechanism. For the sake of legitimating, although, it would be better of if the Governor is not hand-picked and then put into office by the President. The whole process should be done by DPR. President indeed may have right to submit some names, but the names should be nominations by nature, while the decision shall be in the hand of DPR. This should apply also to the accountability report; The Governor of BI should answer to DPR as the trustee. This way, BI will not only free from government subordination but also sits on the same level.
With the Law No. 23 Year 1999 and thus ruled by a mechanism to decide on the Governor and Senior Deputies to Governor, those who occupy positions in the Council of Governors are indeed selected persons with a guaranteed integrity, capability, and credibility. Relevant to this, any candidate Governor and Senior Deputies to Governor shall pass the fit and proper test, thus articulates their vision, experience, expertise or capabilities before the DPR. DPR subsequently shall recommend to the Government on those who are considered to have passed the fit and proper test. Government then will decide on who are to be the Governor and Senior Deputies to Governor. Nonetheless, it is not impossible for any government intervention, one that the mechanism should prevent, by assuring that the Governor and Senior Deputies to Governor are those of a sound competence and experience with a guaranteed integrity, capability, and credibility.
As a conclusion, as an institution BI is not independent, but in regard to the election of the Governor and Senior Deputies to Governor it can be said that BI is independent from the Government. Government does not have the authority to choose or remove them. Government only confirms the assignment of the Governor and Senior Deputies to Governor based on DPR’s recommendation after a fit and proper test. 
Is there any exchange control in Indonesia? If yes, could please, provide us with an English version of the relevant legislation? 

Yes, there is Bank Indonesia Regulation No. 1/9/PBI/1999 on Monitoring of Foreign Exchange Flows of Banks and Non-Bank Financial Institutions. (Please find the Attachment)
Is there a legal requirement for non-financial entities that provide financial services in Indonesia to obtain a license from the Central Bank of the Republic of Indonesia?  If yes, could you, please, identify the legislation which stipulates such licensing requirement and provide us with its English version? 

Basically, non-financial entities that provide financial services is regulated by specific regulation, i.e. the Insurance Company is regulated by Law No. 12 Year 1992, Retirement Fund Company is regulated by Law No. 11 Year 1992 and Financing Company is regulated by Presidential Decree is regulated by Presidential Decree No. 61/1980. The license for non-financial entities that provide financial services in Indonesia is given by Ministry of Finance. In this matter, Central Bank of Republic of Indonesia has the authority to oversee this kind of services.
Are there any reporting requirements for entities (both financial/non-financial) providing e-banking/e-financial services in Indonesia?
Yes there are. These requirements are regulated by:
a)	Central Bank of Republic of Indonesia Regulation No. 5/8/PBI/2003 Dated 19 May 2003 regarding The Application  of Risk Management of Banks
b)	Central Bank of Republic of Indonesia Board  of Director Decree  No. 27/164/KEP/DIR Dated 31 March 1995 regarding The Use of Information Technology.
c)	Central Bank of Republic of Indonesia Circular Letter No. No.6/ 18 /DPNP dated April 20, 2004 regarding the Application of Risk Management of Bank to Internet Banking Services

Does Indonesia have any law (legislation/judicial decision/regulatory instruments issued by the Central Bank of the Republic of Indonesia) expressly addressing the subject of money laundering in relation to e-banking/e-finance services? If yes, could you please, provide us with an English version of such legislation?

We have Money Laundering act but not specifically addressing cases relating to e-banking/e-finance services. But, in broad interpretation, this Money Laundering Act and another Central Bank of Republic of Indonesia (mention above) are applicable to money laundering cases that related to e-banking/e-finance services.
Does Indonesia have any law (legislation/judicial decision/regulatory instruments issued by the Central Bank of the Republic of Indonesia) expressly addressing secure e-payment mechanisms? If yes, could you please, provide us with an English version of such legislation?

          No, we do not have any law regarding this matter. 
11	taxation and customs
Does Indonesia impose a further tax on electronic transactions beyond traditional taxes such as sales tax at the origin of sale or provision of services? If yes, could you, please, provide us with an English version of the relevant legislation?
Indonesia doesn’t impose further tax on e-transaction beyond traditional tax. There is still no specific regulation on this matter in Indonesia.
Does Indonesia impose custom duties on online services at the point of consumption of services? If yes, could you, please, provide us with an English version of the relevant legislation?
No, it does not.
12	Conflict of laws
Does Indonesia have any legislation or a judicial decision setting out the rules for determining when Indonesia has jurisdiction over disputes relating to e-commerce transactions? If yes, could you, please, provide us with an English version of the relevant legislation or a judicial decision?
There is no specific legislation/judicial decision on this matter. 
Does Indonesia have any legislation or a judicial decision setting out the rules for determining which country’s laws will be applicable in disputes relating to e-commerce transactions?  If yes, could you, please, provide us with an English version of the relevant legislation or a judicial decision?
There is no specific legislation/judicial decision on this matter. 
Does Indonesia’s legislation provide for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments? 
According to Article 436 - 437 of Burgelijke reglement of de Rechtsvoldering (usually named “RV”) Indonesian Courts generally do not recognize foreign court judgment. 
Judging from the nature, there are three types of judicial decision in Indonesia, i.e. constitutive decision, declaratory decision, and condemnatory decision (requiring execution). Foreign judicial decision of a constitutive and declaratory nature (e.g. marital divorce, children adoption, etc.) shall be acknowledged. A condemnatory decision of a foreign judicial authority, however, shall not be acknowledged by Indonesian courts.
13	dispute resolution
Does Indonesia have any online mechanism for resolving disputes?
There is no any regulation on this topic.
14	penalties
Is there any legislation or a judicial decision specifically addressing the issue of civil remedies available for:
14.1.1	Online trade mark infringement 
Trade mark infringements insofar are not specifically regulated. The Law No. 15 Year 2002 shall prevail should there be trade mark infringements. The Law, however, does not specifically recognize online trade mark infringements.
14.1.2	Financial loss caused by fraud or forgery in e-commerce transactions
So far there are no specific regulations ruling over theft and or financial loss in e-commerce activities. The Criminal Law and other regulations related to crimes that cause financial loss shall prevail should any case occur concerning theft and or financial loss in e-commerce activities.
14.1.3	Compromise of data
There are no specific regulations. The Criminal Law shall prevail should any case occur concerning theft.
14.1.4	Violation of network integrity
There are no specific regulations concerning disturbance to networks. The Law Telecommunication No 36 Year 1999 Article 22, however, assert that anyone is prohibited to manipulate in an unrightfully or unauthorized manner; (a) access to telecommunication networks; and or (b)  access to telecommunication services; and or (c) access to special telecommunication networks. 
14.1.5	Spam
N/A
14.1.6	Online defamation
N/A. the DoJ would use traditional Penal Code of Indonesia
14.1.7	Online false/misleading advertisement
Online false / misleading advertisement. Misleading advertisement is regulated in the Advertising Code of Ethics. When it comes to public interest, misleading advertisement may be charged under the Law No. 8 Year 1999 on Consumer Protection and Criminal Law.
Is there any legislation or a judicial decision setting out criminal penalties for 
14.1.8	Unauthorized access to/Interference with computer systems
Unauthorized access is regulated in Article 22 the Law No.36 Year 1999 on Telecommunication, where anyone is prohibited to manipulate in an unrightfully or unauthorized manner; (a) access to telecommunication networks; and or (b)  access to telecommunication services; and or (c) access to special telecommunication networks.
14.1.9	Unauthorized interception of/Interference with data
The same as point 15.21
14.1.10	Posting obscene content on the Internet
No specific regulation. The DoJ would use traditional Penal Code
14.1.11	Fraud through e-commerce
No specific regulation. The DoJ would use traditional Penal Code
14.1.12	Forgery in e-commerce transactions
No specific regulation. The DoJ would use traditional Penal Code
14.1.13	Online trade mark infringement offences
Online trade mark infringement offences are not yet specifically regulated. The Law No. 15 Year 2002 shall prevail should there be trade mark infringements. The Law, however, does not specifically recognize online trade mark infringements.
Is there any criminal penalty for other types of acts relating to misuse of computer systems? If yes, could you please, briefly describe the nature of such offences? 
No specific regulation. The DoJ would use traditional Penal Code. Actually Legislative Body of House of Representative has receive A Bill concerning Cyber crime for a reputation NGO’s, please refer to www.gipi.or.id