The Government has issued a Government Regulation in lieu of Law (“Perpu”) No. 1 Year 2005 to postpone the enforcement of the Industrial Relations Dispute Settlement Law (“Law No. 2 of 2004” or “PPHI Law”). Initially, PPHI Law is planned to enter into force by January, 14^th 2005 (last Friday). However, the government considered that it still require considerable time to prepare the entry into force of the PPHI Law.

Several reasons underlies the suspension of PPHI Law, among others, in order to further socialize PPHI Law to the society and to prepare the infrastructure and manpower either within the executive or judicial branches necessary to establish the Industrial Relations Tribunal.

Artilce 1 of the Perpu postpones the enforcement of PPHI Law from the previous January 14^th, 2005 into January 14^th 2006. One year time is believed to be sufficient to prepare all the necessary infrastructure.

At present, labor disputes are being directed to the Regional Labor Dispute Settlement Committee (“P4D”) which operates under the auspices of the Ministry of Labor and Transmigration. Subsequent to the entry into force of PPHI Law, labor disputes must be referred to either mediation, conciliation or Industrial Relation Dispute Court, depending on the nature of the dispute. The Government is currently on the process of transforming P4D into a branch of Labor Ministry functioned with registration of disputes and providing mediation or conciliation services. Another time-consuming step is to establish the Industrial Relation Dispute Court as a separated chamber at State Courts. This will include preparation infrastructure and appointment of judges.

Labor Minister Jacob Nuwa Wea recently stated that the PPHI Law will ensure a speedy and low cost labor dispute settlement and predicts that all cases will be concluded within 120 days (Tempo Interaktif, Dec 16^th 2004). However, labor law expert from UI Prof. Uwiyono has previously reminded that the PPHI Law may not be able to guarantee such speedy and low cost settlement (Hukumonline, January 26^th 2004). The Law, according to Uwiyono,has degraded the alternative dispute resolution function of arbitration, mediation and conciliation since it bars several cases to be referred to those mechanism. Article 1 of the PPHI Law does bar right-based disputes from being referred to arbitration. This means that conflicts arising out of rights or legal formulations must undergone mediation and may even go to Labor Court or Supreme Court if no amicable settlement is reached during the mediation process. Moreover, the Law does not formulate adequate penalty to government officials who failed to perform a speedy and just proceeding.

Enforcement of the PPHI Law will likely to gain more challenge, as Labor NGOs under Dita Indah Sari had planned to submit a petition to the Constitutional Court to invalidate the Law. (mma)