The Urgency of Regulating Blockchain-Based Smart Contracts in International Business Law: Legal Certainty and Global Regulatory Harmonization

Authors

  • Leni Indrawati Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya, Jakarta, Indonesia
  • Dhaniswara K Harjono Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
  • Adi Nur Rohman Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya, Jakarta, Indonesia
  • Elly Rachman Temple University Japan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.38035/sijal.v4i1.417

Keywords:

smart contracts, blockchain, international business law, legal certainty, regulatory harmonization

Abstract

Blockchain-based smart contracts automate cross-border commercial performance, yet their finality does not by itself resolve questions of consent, validity, liability, applicable law, jurisdiction, evidence, remedies, and enforcement. Existing scholarship generally examines domestic contractual validity or sector-specific digital-asset regulation, leaving insufficient analysis of an integrated transnational framework. This study analyzes the legal status and regulatory urgency of smart contracts in international business law and formulates a harmonization model capable of reconciling code-based execution with legal certainty. It employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, comparative, and international-law approaches. Legal instruments and regulatory developments in Indonesia, the United States, the European Union, Singapore, UNCITRAL, and UNIDROIT are analyzed qualitatively. The study finds that functional equivalence and technological neutrality support legal recognition, but fragmented national rules remain inadequate for algorithmic error, oracle failure, code auditing, consumer protection, dispute resolution, and cross-border enforcement. The article proposes Transnational Smart Contract Regulation, an UNCITRAL-oriented model organized around legal recognition, blockchain evidence, electronic signatures, party autonomy, jurisdiction, code auditing, cybersecurity, digital consumer protection, online dispute resolution, and enforcement. Its novelty lies in integrating legal certainty, harmonization, and law-and-technology theories into a risk-based regulatory architecture that preserves innovation while ensuring intelligible consent, accountability, corrective intervention, and interoperable remedies.

References

Allen, J. G. (2018). Wrapped and stacked: Smart contracts and the interaction of natural and formal language. European Review of Private Law, 26(4), 307–343.

Arizona Revised Statutes § 44-7061 (2017).

Brownsword, R. (2019). Law, technology and society: Re-imagining the regulatory environment. Routledge.

Dalhuisen, J. H. (2022). Dalhuisen on transnational comparative, commercial, financial and trade law. Hart Publishing.

De Cruz, P. (2016). Comparative law in a changing world (3rd ed.). Routledge.

De Filippi, P., & Wright, A. (2018). Blockchain and the law: The rule of code. Harvard University Press.

Dickinson, A. (2010). The Rome II Regulation: The law applicable to non-contractual obligations. Oxford University Press.

European Commission. (2020). A European strategy for data. European Union.

European Commission. (2023). A Europe fit for the digital age. European Union.

European Union. (2022a). Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector (Digital Markets Act).

European Union. (2022b). Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 on a single market for digital services (Digital Services Act).

European Union. (2023a). Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 on markets in crypto-assets.

European Union. (2023b). Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 on harmonised rules on fair access to and use of data (Data Act).

Glenn, H. P. (2014). Legal traditions of the world (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Hildebrandt, M. (2015). Smart technologies and the end(s) of law. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Indonesia. (2019). Government Regulation Number 71 of 2019 concerning the implementation of electronic systems and transactions.

Indonesia. (2023). Law Number 4 of 2023 concerning development and strengthening of the financial sector.

Indonesia. (2024). Law Number 1 of 2024 concerning the second amendment to Law Number 11 of 2008 on electronic information and transactions.

Lessig, L. (1999). Code and other laws of cyberspace. Basic Books.

Levy, K. E. C. (2017). Book-smart, not street-smart: Blockchain-based smart contracts and the social workings of law. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society, 3, 1–25.

Marzuki, P. M. (2019). Pengantar ilmu hukum. Kencana.

Monetary Authority of Singapore. (2020). Project Ubin: Central bank digital money using distributed ledger technology.

Monetary Authority of Singapore. (2024). Singapore FinTech ecosystem report.

Nevada Revised Statutes, Chapter 719 (2017).

Pramono, N. (2021). Hukum kontrak di Indonesia. Kencana.

Radbruch, G. (1932). Legal philosophy. Harvard University Press.

Raskin, M. (2017). The law and legality of smart contracts. Georgetown Law Technology Review, 1(2), 304–341.

Reed, C. (2012). Making laws for cyberspace. Oxford University Press.

Reyes, C. L. (2018). Moving beyond Bitcoin to an endogenous theory of decentralized ledger technology regulation. Villanova Law Review, 61, 191–234.

Singapore. (2010). Electronic Transactions Act 2010 (2021 Revised Edition).

Singapore. (2019). Payment Services Act 2019.

Szabo, N. (1996). Smart contracts: Building blocks for digital markets.

Szabo, N. (1997). Formalizing and securing relationships on public networks. First Monday, 2(9).

Tennessee Code Annotated § 47-10-201 et seq. (2018).

UNCITRAL. (1996). Model Law on Electronic Commerce. United Nations.

UNCITRAL. (2001). Model Law on Electronic Signatures. United Nations.

UNCITRAL. (2005). United Nations Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts. United Nations.

UNCITRAL. (2017a). Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution. United Nations.

UNCITRAL. (2017b). Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records. United Nations.

UNCITRAL. (2022). Taxonomy of legal issues related to the digital economy. United Nations.

UNCITRAL. (2024). Model Law on Automated Contracting. United Nations.

UNCTAD. (2024). Digital economy report 2024. United Nations.

UNIDROIT. (2016). Principles of International Commercial Contracts 2016.

UNIDROIT. (2023). Principles on Digital Assets and Private Law.

United Nations. (1958). Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.

Van Hoecke, M. (2002). Law as communication. Hart Publishing.

Werbach, K., & Cornell, N. (2017). Contracts ex machina. Duke Law Journal, 67, 313–382.

Wright, A., & De Filippi, P. (2015). Decentralized blockchain technology and the rise of lex cryptographia. SSRN Electronic Journal.

Published

2026-09-23

How to Cite

Indrawati, L., Harjono, D. K., Rohman, A. N., & Rachman , E. (2026). The Urgency of Regulating Blockchain-Based Smart Contracts in International Business Law: Legal Certainty and Global Regulatory Harmonization. Siber International Journal of Advanced Law (SIJAL), 4(1), 568–585. https://doi.org/10.38035/sijal.v4i1.417