Purpose The purpose of this paper is to critically examine the legal and human rights implications of Indonesia’s Government Regulation Number 56 / 2021, which authorizes the National Collective Management Organization (LMKn) to collect and distribute copyright royalties on behalf of copyright holders. This study explores whether such regulation is compatible with the principle of copyright as a private right under national law and human rights norms. Design/methodology/approach This research adopts a normative legal methodology, focusing on statutory analysis. This study involves doctrinal examination of Indonesian copyright law, human rights instruments and the hierarchy of legal norms, supported by relevant legal literature and jurisprudence. Findings This study reveals that the establishment of LMKn and its extended authority under PP Number 56 / 2021 contradicts the core tenets of Law Number 28 of 2014 on Copyright, particularly the requirement of consent for economic rights delegation. It constitutes an unconstitutional encroachment on private rights, generates legal uncertainty and presents potential for administrative abuse because of overlapping functions with existing collective management organizations (LMKs). Practical implications The findings of this study highlight the need for Indonesia to harmonize its copyright regulation with constitutional safeguards and international intellectual property frameworks. This paper recommends that any limitation on private rights must be explicitly regulated by statute and include sufficient checks and balances to ensure rights protection. Originality/value This paper provides a rare analysis of copyright governance in Indonesia through the lens of human rights and regulatory hierarchy, offering valuable insights into the legal risks of state-mandated collective management in emerging legal systems and situating Indonesia’s case within broader debates on state intervention and private rights across the Global South.
Riswandi et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: