ANALYSIS OF CONSTRUCTION DISPUTE RESOLUTION THROUGH ADJUDICATION AND ITS COMPARISON WITH ARBITRATION

Abstrak

The world of construction work encompasses a series of planning, execution, and supervision activities that include architectural, civil, mechanical, and electrical work. Construction service contracts are drafted by construction service providers and users of construction services (private sector or government). Often, the preparation of construction work contracts is unbalanced because the contract is prepared by one party, namely the construction service provider. Therefore, construction work contracts must be based on the theory of justice to prevent issues from arising in the future. One of the main problems in construction implementation in Indonesia is the existence of construction disputes between service users and contractors as service providers. The tendency for disputes to occur is due to the dynamic nature of construction contracts, which differ from other types of contracts. The aim of this study is to analyze how construction disputes are resolved in Indonesia and to compare this with the resolution of construction work contract disputes through adjudication and arbitration. The type of research used is normative legal research with approaches based on legislation, concepts, and comparisons. The analysis of legal materials in this study is conducted descriptively, interpretively, evaluatively, and argumentatively. The results of the study indicate that the resolution of construction disputes in Indonesia is regulated in Article 88 of Law Number 2 of 2017 concerning Construction Services, which includes: Mediation, Conciliation, and Arbitration. The comparison between adjudication and arbitration in their function as a resolution for construction work contract disputes can be simply described as adjudication being a dispute resolution mechanism that shares similarities in characteristics with arbitration. However, the adjudication mechanism is actually simpler than arbitration.