Arbitration Of Indonesian Sports And Athlete Sponsorship Contracts
1. Introduction: Arbitration in Indonesian Sports & Sponsorship Contracts
Arbitration is a common mechanism for resolving disputes arising from sports contracts, including athlete sponsorship agreements, club‑sponsor disputes, and federation–member conflicts. In Indonesia, arbitration in the sports context operates at both national and international levels, depending on the forum agreed upon in contracts or rules of sporting bodies.
At the national level, arbitration bodies such as:
BAKI – Badan Arbitrase Keolahragaan Indonesia (Indonesia Sports Arbitration Board),
BAORI – Badan Arbitrase Olahraga Indonesia (Indonesian Sports Arbitration),
NDRC – National Dispute Resolution Chamber (mainly for football disputes)
handle disputes involving athletes, clubs, sponsors, and federations. These institutions provide fast, specialist resolution outside of ordinary courts, aligning with Law No. 11 of 2022 on Sports (which supports arbitration for sports disputes).
At the international level, cases involving national federations, international events, or cross‑border sponsorship agreements often go to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) — a Swiss‑based arbitration institution recognized globally.
2. Legal Basis for Arbitration in Indonesian Sports Contracts
2.1 Arbitration in Sports Law
Law No. 11 of 2022 on Sports expressly allows disputes in sports to be resolved through arbitration.
Arbitration is especially relevant where contractual rights and obligations (including sponsorship contracts) exist between athletes, teams, sponsors, clubs, and federations.
Arbitration awards by national sports arbitration bodies (e.g., BAORI/BAKI) are intended to be final and binding on the parties in Indonesia.
2.2 Institutional Framework
BAKI was established as a national sports arbitration center with authority to decide on disputes involving athletes, coaches, clubs, sponsors, and other sporting stakeholders.
BAORI has functioned as a sports arbitration body under KONI’s authority, handling disputes including internal governance and athlete status issues (e.g., mutasi/transfer).
NDRC is focused on resolving football‑related contractual disputes (e.g., player contracts, transfers, wages), and has FIFA recognition.
When disputes involve international federations or multi‑jurisdiction sponsorship issues, parties commonly agree to CAS arbitration.
3. Why Arbitration Matters in Sports/Sponsorship Contracts
Sports contracts, especially sponsorship agreements, often involve:
Commercial terms (payments, deliverables, appearance obligations),
Marketing rights and intellectual property,
Exclusivity obligations,
Termination and breach provisions,
Interaction with federation rules (e.g., anti‑doping, code of conduct),
Cross‑jurisdiction enforcement (e.g., enforcement of an international arbitration award on national assets).
Arbitration provides specialist tribunals with subject‑matter experience, confidentiality, finality, and often faster resolution compared to regular courts.
4. Notable Arbitration Cases & Decisions Involving Indonesian Sports
The following cases illustrate how arbitration plays out in sports and related contractual disputes involving Indonesian parties, athletes, teams, or federations:
Case 1 — Mutasi Atlet Dispute via BAORI (Karate Federation)
Context: A complex internal dispute occurred involving the Indonesian Karate‑do organization Perguruan Karate Inkatsu Pordibya. A BAORI arbitration panel ruled on issues including validity of leadership decisions, athlete affiliation, and contractual statuses based on association bylaws.
Relevance:
Shows how sports arbitration applies to internal governance issues that affect athlete contracts, membership, recognition, and sponsor obligations (e.g., rights to represent logos, branding).
Demonstrates arbitration’s role where contracts interact with organizational legality and membership rights.
Case 2 — Federasi Senam Israel v. Indonesia (CAS Arbitration, 2025)
Context: The Federasi Senam Israel filed a claim at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) after Indonesia refused visas for their athletes to compete in the 2025 World Gymnastics Championships in Jakarta. The CAS tribunal rejected the claim.
Relevance:
Although geopolitical, this is effectively arbitration of sports participation rights under international sports law.
It illustrates how CAS handles disputes involving national federations and their athletes, including issues that indirectly affect sponsorship (exposure, event access).
It affirms arbitration’s role in international sporting event disputes.
Case 3 — National Football Dispute via NDRC (Player‑Club Contract)
Context: Disputes under football player contracts — such as wage claims, transfer issues, and contract stability — are handled by the National Dispute Resolution Chamber (NDRC) under PSSI and FIFA‑aligned regulations.
Relevance:
These decisions often set precedent for how sponsorship rights and commercial guarantees are respected in club–player deals that include sponsor obligations (e.g., apparel sponsorship payments tied to roster status).
Demonstrates arbitration application in labour and contract enforcement in sport.
Case 4 — PSPS Riau Compliance with NDRC Sanctions
Context: Indonesian football clubs (e.g., PSPS Riau) have faced enforcement of NDRC arbitration sanctions (e.g., registration bans) due to contractual disputes, which then triggered protest/appeals to FIFA/NDRC.
Relevance: Arbitration decisions here affect club financial commitments, which in turn affect sponsor relationships (as sponsor payments often depend on club eligibility and performance).
Case 5 — CAS Decisions on Federation Sanctions Affecting Indonesians
While not formally “Indonesian sports arbitration,” CAS arbitration has dealt with appeals against international federation decisions involving Indonesian athletes or organizations in regional/multisport contexts. CAS jurisprudence (e.g., decision 2012/A/2688 involving Indonesian football clubs in a dispute with PSSI) shows how sports arbitration spans club–association disputes that mirror sponsorship issues (like rights triggered by league participation).
Case 6 — Dual Arbitration Bodies and Contract Forum Selection Conflicts
Context: Prior to consolidation of sports arbitration institutions, parties often had to choose between BAORI and BAKI, creating inconsistent arbitration outcomes and forum disputes. Legal debates on this dualism shaped how arbitration clauses in athlete and sponsorship contracts were interpreted, and sometimes how cases were challenged in courts when parties tried to avoid arbitration.
Relevance:
Shows the importance of clear arbitration clauses in sponsorship contracts to avoid forum conflicts.
Reflects real disputes where parties competed over proper arbitration venue.
5. Application: Arbitration Clauses in Sports & Sponsorship Contracts
When drafting sports or athlete sponsorship contracts in Indonesia:
Key Elements to Include
• Clear Arbitration Clause
Specify the arbitration institution: BAORI, BAKI, NDRC, or CAS depending on:
Parties’ nationality,
Governing federation,
Whether international enforcement is likely.
• Seat of Arbitration
Designate the seat (e.g., Jakarta for national; Lausanne/Swiss for CAS) — affects enforceability and procedural laws.
• Choice of Law
Specify applicable substantive law (e.g., Indonesian law, FIFA regulations, sponsor country law).
• Scope of Disputes Covered
Define covered issues: payment, intellectual property, breach, termination, branding rights, performance obligations.
6. Enforcement of Awards
Awards from national sports arbitration (BAKI/BAORI/NDRC) are intended to be final and binding in Indonesia and cannot be taken to ordinary courts unless there are procedural issues (e.g., fraud).
CAS awards can be enforced under the New York Convention where relevant, subject to public policy constraints in domestic courts.
7. Conclusion
Arbitration in Indonesian sports and athlete sponsorship contracts is now institutionalized and recognized under national law, complemented by international sports arbitration (CAS) where cross‑border issues arise. While institutional dualism has historically caused challenges, the legal landscape — supported by arbitration awards and national jurisprudence — increasingly supports arbitration as the primary and specialized mechanism for resolving sports‑related disputes involving contractual rights, obligations, and commercial sponsorship interests.
RELATED Blog
comments