Ramadan and the DGIP

Sunday (29 June 2014) marked the start of Ramadan - a month of fasting for Muslims, that will conclude with the celebration of Eid al-Fitr.  Around 90% of Indonesians are Muslim and will be observing Ramadan.

Ramadan has a significant effect on legal practice in Indonesia.  Government authorities generally operate at reduced capacity, and response times from the private sector can also be slow.  Some Muslims also believe that confrontation should be avoided during Ramadan, and this can impact on the conduct of dispute resolution.

Access to the Directorate-General of Intellectual Property ("DGIP”) will be affected, it having adopted the following reduced opening hours for its filing counters:

Monday to Thursday8:00am to 2:00pm, with a short break for lunch between 12:00pm and 12:30pm
(usually 8:00am to 3:00pm) 

Friday8:00am to 2:00pm, with a longer break for lunch between 11:30am and 1:00pm to accommodate Friday prayers
(usually 8:00am to 3:30pm)

Our offices, Courts and most government offices (including the DGIP and BPOM) will be closed from 28 July 2014 to 1 August 2014.  We will open for business as usual on Monday 4 August.

IP Consultants new & old

Both prospective and current IP Consultants have been a focus of attention from the the Directorate-General of Intellectual Property (“DGIP”) this month, with the formal commencement of a new round of IP Consultant’s training, and a review of the performance of current IP Consultants.

The DGIP formally commenced a new round of IP Consultant’s training on 24 May 2014 at the Bina Nusantara University in Jakarta (see here).  Opening remarks were delivered by Tosin Junansyah (Acting Director-General), who noted the important role IP Consultants play in the socialisation of intellectual property as well as the prosecution of intellectual property rights.

Earlier this month (June 2014), the DGIP started a five-yearly review of the performance of existing IP Consultants.  All 735 registered IP Consultants will have received a notice requiring them to report on the following by 16 June 2014:

• number of applied copyright, patent, trademark and industrial design rights;
• number of applied geographical indications;
• number of applied integrated circuit designs;
• number of trade secrets advised on; and
• summary of activities to promote the socialisation of intellectual property.

Patent regulation on priority list for 2014

As he approaches the end of his term, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has signed off on a decree that sets out bills to that are to be prioritised and issued within 2014.

Presidential Decree No. 19 of 2014 on Government Regulation Drafting Program (“2014 Decree”), which came into force on 20 May 2014, includes one intellectual property law - Implementing Regulation of Law No. 14 of 2001 on Patents.  This regulation sets out a new framework for:

1. patent applications;
2. application filing procedures;
3. administrative examination;
4. certification of patents and simple patents;
5. publication of patent applications; and
6. recordal in the General Register of Patents.

If the regulation comes into force it will replace:

1. Government Regulation No. 34 of 1991 on patent application procedures;
2. Government Regulation No. 11 of 1993 on the form and content of patent forms;
3. Ministerial Decision (Justice Minister) No. M.01.HC.02.10 of 1991 on simple patents;
4. Ministerial Decision (Justice Minister) No. M.02.HC.02.10 of 1991 on the publication of patents;
5. Ministerial Decision (Justice Minister) No. M.04.HC.02.10 of 1991 on the rules, timeframes, and procedures for paying patent fees;
6. Ministerial Decision (Justice Minister) No. M.06.HC.02.10 of 1991 on the patent applications; and
7. Ministerial Decision (Justice Minister) No. M.08.HC.02.10 of 1991 on the recordal and request of copies of documents.

In a separate post we will discuss the impact this new regulation will have on patent prosecution in Indonesia.

Budget cuts to Judicial Commission

According to a recent article in the Jakarta Post (see here), the Judicial Commission’s budget for 2014 has been cut by 27 percent.

The Judicial Commission is an independent body, tasked with calling and disciplining judges of the Supreme Court as well as lower courts - including the Commercial Court, which hears first-instance intellectual property cases (see our post on the Judicial Commission here).  The Judicial Commission is now saying it will not have sufficient resources to participate in the selection of judges (which is a task it is required by the Judicial Commission Law to perform - see our post on fit and proper test here).  It will apparently continue to receive and act on complaints from the public about misconduct of Justices.

This is most definitely a step in the wrong direction.  Lack of confidence in the Indonesian judiciary has long been a significant issue (see our post here, for example) that more, and not less, attention and resources need to be devoted to addressing.

Criminal enforcement statistics - police

Buried in a story on the launch of 'Turn Back Crime' (here) - a initiative of Interpol’s Indonesia National Central Bureau against organised crime - is a little treasure. It's the number of IP cases investigated by the National Police in 2013, which the Jakarta Post reports is 589.

It's a rare thing to see a hard performance number from the National Police, which does not systematically publish statistics. Despite operating on a much smaller scale with around 50 raids each year, the DGIP's (Directorate-General of Intellectual Property) PPNS (civil enforcement officers) does, and is often praised for its transparency and accountability. 

Now we have confirmation that the National Police have been handling a heavy caseload. 589 is an impressive number for 2013 - that's around fifty cases each month. It's a realistic number too, considering there are four levels of police authority that can act on IP complaints - MABES (national police); POLDA (regional police); POLSEC (sector police); and POLRES (resort police) - anywhere in the country.

Interpol's 'Turn Back Crime' is supposed to be (in part at least) an anti-counterfeiting initiative. But, based on the Jakarta Post story, the initiative appears to essentially be a PR campaign to discourage consumers from buying counterfeit product. This in itself may have a negligible impact. But 50 police raids a month will - hopefully this number can be formalised and counted as part of Indonesia's IP enforcement efforts. The United States Trade Representative, for example, would find this very interesting for the purposes of its Special 301 report (see our post on the Special 301 report here).