Indonesia and the Philippines small claims: similarities and differences

Small Claims Courts of Indonesia and Philippines conducted hearings for speedy disposition of cases where defendant failed to meet obligations on loan. The litigation does not need legal counsel, thus it is low cost and has jurisdiction over civil cases. Indonesia’s high percentage of judgment defau...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Glenda E. Feliprada, Jayum Jawan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Fakulti Sains Sosial dan Kemanusiaan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia 2019
Online Access:http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14260/
http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14260/1/36297-114476-1-SM.pdf
_version_ 1848813505076002816
author Glenda E. Feliprada,
Jayum Jawan,
author_facet Glenda E. Feliprada,
Jayum Jawan,
author_sort Glenda E. Feliprada,
building UKM Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Small Claims Courts of Indonesia and Philippines conducted hearings for speedy disposition of cases where defendant failed to meet obligations on loan. The litigation does not need legal counsel, thus it is low cost and has jurisdiction over civil cases. Indonesia’s high percentage of judgment default of the corporation plaintiff defeats the goal of assisting the poor and marginalized sectors of society. On the other hand, in the Philippines, the large number of compromised agreement is an indicator of meeting the goal of assisting the poor. Arriving at a compromise requires efforts and time in negotiations that results in the reduction of payment rates and in an instalment mode of repayment. The inclusion of writ of execution to litigate default of payment is commendable while in Indonesia parties have no legal mechanism to enforce default payment of the defendant which is a weakness or limitation of legal procedure. The issues that need to be addressed by both countries include lack of public information and the strict implementation of usury law against exorbitant interest rates. Indonesia’s extrajudicial settlement and writ of execution need to be included in the Small Claims mechanism. The absence of writ execution renders the result useless.
first_indexed 2025-11-15T00:19:15Z
format Article
id oai:generic.eprints.org:14260
institution Universiti Kebangasaan Malaysia
institution_category Local University
language English
last_indexed 2025-11-15T00:19:15Z
publishDate 2019
publisher Fakulti Sains Sosial dan Kemanusiaan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling oai:generic.eprints.org:142602020-02-14T23:42:40Z http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14260/ Indonesia and the Philippines small claims: similarities and differences Glenda E. Feliprada, Jayum Jawan, Small Claims Courts of Indonesia and Philippines conducted hearings for speedy disposition of cases where defendant failed to meet obligations on loan. The litigation does not need legal counsel, thus it is low cost and has jurisdiction over civil cases. Indonesia’s high percentage of judgment default of the corporation plaintiff defeats the goal of assisting the poor and marginalized sectors of society. On the other hand, in the Philippines, the large number of compromised agreement is an indicator of meeting the goal of assisting the poor. Arriving at a compromise requires efforts and time in negotiations that results in the reduction of payment rates and in an instalment mode of repayment. The inclusion of writ of execution to litigate default of payment is commendable while in Indonesia parties have no legal mechanism to enforce default payment of the defendant which is a weakness or limitation of legal procedure. The issues that need to be addressed by both countries include lack of public information and the strict implementation of usury law against exorbitant interest rates. Indonesia’s extrajudicial settlement and writ of execution need to be included in the Small Claims mechanism. The absence of writ execution renders the result useless. Fakulti Sains Sosial dan Kemanusiaan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia 2019-12 Article PeerReviewed application/pdf en http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14260/1/36297-114476-1-SM.pdf Glenda E. Feliprada, and Jayum Jawan, (2019) Indonesia and the Philippines small claims: similarities and differences. Jebat: Malaysian Journal of History, Politics and Strategic Studies, 46 (2). pp. 220-239. ISSN 2180-0251 http://ejournal.ukm.my/jebat/issue/view/1229
spellingShingle Glenda E. Feliprada,
Jayum Jawan,
Indonesia and the Philippines small claims: similarities and differences
title Indonesia and the Philippines small claims: similarities and differences
title_full Indonesia and the Philippines small claims: similarities and differences
title_fullStr Indonesia and the Philippines small claims: similarities and differences
title_full_unstemmed Indonesia and the Philippines small claims: similarities and differences
title_short Indonesia and the Philippines small claims: similarities and differences
title_sort indonesia and the philippines small claims: similarities and differences
url http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14260/
http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14260/
http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14260/1/36297-114476-1-SM.pdf