Persatuan Kurator dan Pengurus Indonesia (“PERKAPI”) prevailed before the Jakarta Administrative Court in Case No. 131/G/2026/PTUN.JKT, after the Panel of Judges declared inadmissible the lawsuit filed by Perserikatan Kurator dan Pengurus Indonesia (“PKPI”) against the Minister of Law of the Republic of Indonesia. In this case, AMAR Law Firm & Public Interest Law Office (“AMAR”) represented PERKAPI as the Second Defendant-Intervenor.
The dispute arose from PKPI’s challenge against the Decree of the Minister of Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. AHU-0000042.AH.01.07.TAHUN 2026 concerning the approval of PERKAPI’s establishment. PKPI argued that the name “Persatuan Kurator dan Pengurus Indonesia” was substantially similar to “Perserikatan Kurator dan Pengurus Indonesia”, allegedly causing harm to its identity, reputation, organizational activities, and potentially giving rise to unfair competition.
During the proceedings, one of the objections raised by the Defendant and PERKAPI as the Second Defendant-Intervenor was that PKPI lacked the requisite legal interest (legal standing) to bring the lawsuit.
The Panel of Judges considered that, in administrative court proceedings, a plaintiff must demonstrate an interest that is personal, objectively identifiable, and directly connected to the administrative decision being challenged. The Court also took into account that, prior to PERKAPI’s establishment, several other professional associations of curators and administrators had already operated alongside one another.
On this basis, the Panel concluded that the alleged losses claimed by PKPI did not establish the legal interest required to bring the lawsuit. In its ruling, the Jakarta Administrative Court:
- rejected the Plaintiff’s application for suspension;
- upheld the objection raised by the Defendant and the Second Defendant-Intervenor regarding the Plaintiff’s lack of legal interest;
- declared the Plaintiff’s lawsuit inadmissible; and
- ordered the Plaintiff to pay the costs of the proceedings.
With the objection on legal standing being upheld, PERKAPI prevailed in the proceedings, while the Panel did not proceed to examine the merits of the dispute. The decision also reiterates the importance of legal interest as a fundamental prerequisite for bringing a claim before the Administrative Court.
AMAR Law Firm & Public Interest Law Office acted as legal counsel to PERKAPI in its capacity as the Second Defendant-Intervenor in the proceedings.
