Language Requirements in Contracts Applying Indonesia Law: Insights from Recent Legal Developments (适用印尼法的合同中的语言要求：近期法律发展的见解)

Introduction

引言

In recent years, the Indonesian market has gradually entered the global business spotlight, becoming an important destination for many companies investing and trading in Southeast Asia. With the growth of the Indonesian economy and the continuous release of market potential, more and more companies are considering establishing branches in Indonesia or collaborating with local enterprises. However, the choice of contract language often confuses foreign businesses during their dealings with Indonesian companies. In particular, there are differing views on whether it is necessary to include Indonesian language in contracts applying Indonesia law, which has significant implications for foreign enterprises/operations and compliance. This article will discuss in detail, in light of recent legal developments in Indonesia, whether contracts governed by Indonesian law must include the Indonesian language.

近年来，印度尼西亚（以下简称 “印尼“）市场逐渐走入全球商业视野，成为众多企业在东南亚投资和贸易的重要目的地之一，随着印尼经济的增长和市场潜力的不断释放，越来越多的公司开始考虑在印尼设立分支机构或于当地企业开展合作。然而，在与印尼企业进行业务往来的过程中，合同语言的选择常常让外商感到困惑。特别是，对于是否必须在合同中包含印尼语这一问题，各方观点不一，这对外国企业的运营和合规性产生了重要影响。本文将结合印尼近期的法律发展，详细讨论适用印尼法的合同中是否必须包含印尼语。

Interpretation of the Language Requirements under Indonesian Law

印尼法下对于语言要求的解读

The requirements for the language to be used in contracts and Memoranda of Understanding (the “MOU“) involving Indonesian state institutions, companies, or individuals are set out in Law No. 24 of 2009 on National Flag, Language, Coat of Arms, and Anthem (“Language Law“) and Presidential Regulation No. 63 of 2019 on the Use of Indonesian Language (“Regulation 63/2019“). These regulations mandate that such documents include an Indonesian language version alongside any foreign language versions. In the event of a discrepancy between the versions, parties may agree on the prevailing language for interpretation.

关于印尼国家机构、公司或个人在合同和谅解备忘录（以下简称 “备忘录“）中使用的语言的要求是在2009年第24号关于国旗、语言、纹章和国歌的法律（”以下简称”《语言法》“）和关于印尼语使用的2019年第63号总统条例（”第63/2019号条例“）中规定。根据这些法律、条例的规定，合同和备忘录等文件在采用外语版本的同时，还应当包含印尼文版本。如果不同版本之间存在差异，合同各当事方可另行商榷哪种语言版本优先适用。

Indonesian courts’ views on interpretation of the Language Law and Regulation 63/2019 are varied. Some court decisions hold that the inclusion of an Indonesian version of a contract or an MOU is an imperative element of contract validity. Pursuant to Article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code (“ICC“), one of the objective elements of the formation of a contract is that a contract must contain clauses permissible under prevailing laws. Consequently, the absence of an Indonesian version could render a contract void by law. Conversely, some other courts regard the use of an Indonesian version as a mere formality, impacting contract validity only if substantive provisions violate prevailing laws.

《语言法》和第63/2019号法规没有明确规定不使用印尼语会有什么惩罚性的后果。印尼法院对《语言法》和第63/2019号法规的解释意见不一。一些法院判决认为，包含印尼文版本的合同或者备忘录是合同有效性的必要因素。根据《印度尼西亚民法典》（以下简称 “印尼民法典“）第1320条，合同成立的客观要素之一是必须包含现行法律要求的条款。因此，如果没有印尼文版本，合同依法无效。相反，其他一些法院认为使用印尼语只是一种形式，只有当实质性条款违反现行法律时才会影响合同的有效性。

In December 2023, the Supreme Court issued Circular Letter No. 3 of 2023 (“SC Letter 3/2023“), which advises lower courts that the absence of an Indonesian version in agreements with Indonesian institutions, companies, and/or individuals should not automatically invalidate the contract. Invalidity should be considered only if it is proven that the omission resulted from fraudulent intent by the parties involved.

2023年12月，印尼最高法院发布了2023年第3号通函（以下简称 “3号通函“），建议下级法院在处理与印尼机构、公司和/或个人签订的合同或备忘录中缺少印尼文版本的案件时，合同不应自动失效。只有在可以证明有关当事人因欺诈意图而遗漏印尼语的情况下，才应考虑合同无效。

SC Letter 3/2023 provides further clarification that the lack of an Indonesian version alone does not constitute grounds for contract revocation. Instead, the focus should be on whether there is bad faith in the absence of an Indonesian version in the contract. SC Letter 3/2023 only serves as a guideline for lower courts rather than a formal law.

3号通函进一步指明，缺少印尼语版本本身并不构成撤销合同的理由。相反，重点应放在合同中没有印尼文版本是否存在恶意。但请注意该3号通函只是最高法院对下级法院的指导原则，而非正式出台的法律。

Under the ICC, the concept of good faith encompasses both objective and subjective criteria. The objective criteria is to ensure that the contract is made properly, and subjective criteria pertain to the parties’ intentions and morality. Thus, good faith should be assessed with respect to the parties’ representations and information affecting their consent to the contract.

根据印尼民法典，诚信的判定既包括客观标准也包括主观标准。客观上需要确保合同的正确订立，主观上与当事人的意图和道德有关。因此，诚信应根据当事人的陈述和影响其合同合意的信息进行整体的判断。

While there have been some developments in the Indonesian courts’ interpretation of the validity of contracts lacking an Indonesian version, and SC Letter 3/2023 offering some leeway for contracts to remain valid despite this absence, it remains advisable to include an Indonesian version in contracts involving Indonesian entities or individuals to comply with the Language Law and Regulation 63/2019. The absence of an Indonesian version may still be considered a breach of the Language Law, albeit one that does not necessarily void the contract.

虽然印尼法院就无印尼语版本的合同的有效性的解读有一些发展，3号通函在这方面提供了一定的灵活性，使得合同在没有印尼语版本的情况下仍然可能有效，但在与印尼公司或个人签订合同时，仍然建议在合同中加入印尼语版本以符合《语言法》和第63/2019号条例，缺少印尼语版本的合同仍可能被视为违反《语言法》，尽管这不一定会使合同无效。

Key Takeaways

主要启示

SC Letter 3/2023 adds clarity to a previously contentious issue and is expected to reduce costs for foreign parties contracting with Indonesian entities.

3号通函进一步澄清了之前存在争议的问题，这可能将降低与印尼公司签订合同的外国当事方的风险和成本。

For important and high-value contracts, including an Indonesian version is recommended where feasible, as it aligns with the Language Law requirements despite the revised stance on contract invalidity under SC Letter 3/2023.

对于重要且高价值的合同，建议在可行的情况下纳入印尼语版本以符合《语言法》的要求，尽管3号通函明确了合同中缺少印尼语版本并不会当然造成合同无效的立场。