Inequality Between Parties In The Industrial Relations Court: Reconstructing Equality of Arms Between Workers and Employers

Abstrak

Inequality between workers and employers in the settlement of industrial relations disputes stems not only from disparities in economic power but may also arise from procedural rules that formally treat both parties equally while overlooking their differing practical capacities to access judicial forums, manage procedural time constraints, navigate procedural stages, and produce evidence. This study aims to examine the forms of procedural inequality between workers and employers before the Industrial Relations Court and to reconstruct the principle of equality of arms as a normative basis for reforming the procedural law governing industrial relations dispute resolution in Indonesia. This study employs a normative-doctrinal legal research method using statutory, case, conceptual, and comparative approaches. The analysis focuses on Law No. 2 of 2004 and several Constitutional Court decisions issued in 2025–2026 concerning relative jurisdiction, time limits for filing claims, and mediation procedures. The findings demonstrate that formal equality does not necessarily result in genuine procedural equality. Procedural inequality manifests in four principal dimensions: access to judicial forums, procedural time arrangements, procedural stages, and evidentiary processes. Accordingly, the principle of equality of arms should not be confined to evidentiary matters but should serve as a comprehensive framework for designing the procedural law of the Industrial Relations Court. The novelty of this study lies in the concept of substantive equality of arms, comprising access equality, temporal equality, procedural equality, and evidentiary equality. This framework is intended to ensure that workers and employers are afforded a reasonable and effective opportunity to assert and defend their rights without placing either party at a substantial procedural disadvantage. Reform of Industrial Relations Court procedure should therefore move beyond formal equality toward substantive procedural equality while preserving legal certainty, judicial impartiality, and a fair balance between the interests of the parties.

Keywords

Industrial Relations Court; equality of arms; procedural justice; workers; employers; access to justice