RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/Q1/IDN/13
G/SCM/Q1/IDN/13
9 November 1999
(99-4826)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing MeasuresOriginal:  English
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER
ARTICLES 18.5 AND 32.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS
Replies to Questions Posed by the UNITED STATES1 and ARGENTINA2
Regarding the Notification of INDONESIA3
The following communication, dated 2 November 1999, has been received from the
Permanent Mission of Indonesia.
__________
QUESTIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES
Q1. Indonesia’s submission states that, in or der to implement Article 13 of the WTO Anti-
Dumping Agreement regarding “Judicial Review,” based on Law No. 17/1997 dated
23 May 1997 and Presidential Decree No. 41/1997 dated 7 October 1997, Indonesia has
established a Tax Dispute Settlement Board as a Judicial Review Body for the settlement of tax
disputes.  However, the submission does not exp licitly state that either the Board or the Agency
For the Settlement of Tax Disputes (the Agency) has jurisdiction over decisions of the
Indonesian Anti-Dumping Committee.  Do they  have  such jurisdiction?  If not, is jurisdiction to
review the decisions of the Anti-Dumping Committee provided elsewhere in Indonesian law?
Reply
The Tax Dispute Settlement Board has the full jurisdiction over the decisions of the
Indonesian Anti-Dumping Committee.  Article 35 of Government Regulation 34, 1996, confirms that
the Anti-Dumping legislation is part of the Custom Laws which falls under the Tax Law of Indonesia.
Q2. Article 1(3) of Law No.17/1997 dated 23 May 1997 defines tax laws as “all regulations in
taxation.”  Does the definition of tax laws include the laws governing the imposition and
collection of anti-dumping and/or countervailing duties?
Reply
The definition of Tax Laws under Article 1(3) of Law No. 17/1997 includes the laws
governing the imposition and collection of Anti-Dumping and/or Countervailing Duties.
                                                     
1 G/ADP/Q1/IDN/12-G/SCM/Q1/IDN/12
2 G/ADP/Q1/IDN/11-G/SCM/Q1/IDN/11
3 G/ADP/N/1/IDN/2/Suppl.1-G/SCM/N/1/IDN/2/Suppl.1G/ADP/Q1/IDN/13
G/SCM/Q1/IDN/13
Page 2
Q3. Do all interested parties who participated in the administrative proceeding subject to
appeal have access to the appeal process?
Reply
All interested parties participating in the administrative proceeding have access to the appeal
process.
Q4. Are there any limitations on what can be appealed?  For example, can questions
concerning both injury and dump ing/subsidization be appealed, and can questions of both law
and fact be appealed?
Reply
All issues related to the implementation of the Anti-Dumping Law can be appealed.
Q5. Could you please clarify the meaning of Article 46(1) of Law No. 17/1997 concerning the
chairperson’s discretion to appoint a council co mprising 3 (three) members or a single member
to decide an appeal?  In circumstances where a single member may dispose of an appeal, does
review by a three-member panel remain available?
Reply
The chairperson exercises discretion in terms of selecting three or one single member
depending on the complexity of the case.  One member councils are approved for minor cases defined
under Article 65 as a means of facilitating speedy procedures laid down under Article 64 of LawNo. 17/1997.  However, as an appeal covering the anti-dumping law would fall under an ordinary
procedure as laid down under Article 48, the council would comprise of three members.  The law does
not allow for an appeal of a decision reached by one member council.
Q6. What is the difference between the following three actions:  (1) an appeal, as defined in
Article 1(6); (2) a lawsuit, as defined in Article 1(7); and (3) an objection to anti-dumping duties
filed before the Appeal Institute, as provided for under Article 35 of the Indonesian Anti-Dumping Laws and Article 97 of the Indonesian Customs Laws?
Reply
A lawsuit is relevant to tax collection, and appeals to tax decisions.  The Appeals Institute no
longer exists and has been replaced by the Agency.
Q7. What is the standard of review of the Ag ency, and does it vary depending on the nature
of the issue on appeal?
Reply
An Appeal should be lodged within 3 (three) months of the final decision taken.  There is no
time-limit imposed on the appeal Body to reach a ruling.
Q8. What documents comprise the record for rev iew?  Is the record limited to documents
presented during the administrative process?G/ADP/Q1/IDN/13
G/SCM/Q1/IDN/13
Page 3
Reply
The record for review is limited to documents presented during the administrative process.
Q9. What is the precedential effect of the Agency’s rulings?
Reply
The Agency's ruling may have a precedential effect.
Q10. Does the Agency have the authority to re mit the case to the Anti-Dumping Committee or
the Minister of Finance for further determinations?
Reply
The Agency does not have the authority to remit the case to the Anti-Dumping Committee or
the Ministry of Finance for further determination.
Q11. What, if any, right exists to appeal a rulin g by the Agency?  To what judicial body may
such appeals be filed?
Reply
There are no rights to appeal a ruling by the Agency.
Q12. Article 1, paras. 12 through 19 set forth the general organization and structure of the
Agency.  These paragraphs define the position s officials will occupy within the Agency.
Paragraph 19 identifies the minister of the Agency as the Minister of Finance.  Pursuant to
Article 6 of the Indonesian Anti-Dumping Laws and Article 5 of the Decree of the Minister of
Industry and Trade (No. 136/MPP/Kep/6/1996), the Minister of Finance is identified as a
member of the Anti-Dumping Committee which is charged with the administration of the anti-
dumping laws and rendering final determinations and reviews of determinations. Article 27 of
the Indonesian Anti-Dumping Laws also provides that the Minister of Finance shall decide therate of the anti-dumping and countervailing duties.
The appointment of the Minister of Finance as the Minister of the Agency for the
Settlement of Tax Disputes and as a member of the Anti-Dumping Committee results in an
overlap of authority.  This necessarily means that the authority responsible for making the
administrative determinations will also have au thority over the Agency, which is responsible for
adjudicating the appeals of those determinations .  Presuming that the Agency has jurisdiction
over decisions of the Anti-Dumping Committee, such an appointment would appear to be in
contravention of Article 13 of the A-D Agreement and Article 23 of the SCM Agreement, both
of which require that judicial review be indepe ndent of the authorities responsible for the
determination or review in question.
Please explain to what extent, if any, Indonesia plans to implement procedures to
maintain the Agency’s autonomy and independence from the body rendering administrative
determinations, as required by Articles 13 and 23 of the A-D and SCM Agreements,respectively.G/ADP/Q1/IDN/13
G/SCM/Q1/IDN/13
Page 4
Reply
The Ministry of Finance does not have authority over the Agency, as the role is limited to one
of administration.  The Judge is independent and approved by the President.
QUESTION FROM ARGENTINA
Pursuant to  Article 13 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the
GATT 1994 (Agreement on Anti-Dumping), Indonesia has notified that it has established a Tax
Dispute Settlement Board as a judicial review body in those matters.  Does the creation of thisspecialized body mean that the party affected by an anti-dumping or countervailing measure
has direct access to that judicial body or does the party first have to exhaust administrative
remedies with the authority th at introduced the measure?
Reply
The Tax Dispute Settlement Agency is the Agency responsible for receiving any form of
complaint related to the decision in the implementation of the Anti-Dumping and Subsidy Law in
Indonesia.
Any complaint regarding the application of the Anti-Dumping and Subsidy Law is admissible
to the Tax Dispute Settlement Agency.
__________