Determining an appropriate patent working requirement for Indonesia

Abstract This study examines the feasibility of reintroducing a local working requirement in Indonesia's patent law that aligns with national interests while adhering to the TRIPS Agreement. Through normative legal research, it evaluates relevant laws, legal theories, and literature to develop an evidence‐based approach that reconciles local needs with international obligations. Although Article 27(1) of TRIPS could limit local working provisions, supplementary provisions such as Articles 8(1), 30, and 31, along with the Paris Convention and the Doha Declaration, provide flexibility for countries to implement local working requirements. These provisions, if applied judiciously, can serve the public interest, bolster economic growth, and ensure access to critical technologies. Furthermore, the TRIPS Agreement's negotiation history implies that local working provisions were intended to remain a viable aspect of patent law, supporting diverse member‐country perspectives. To maximize the benefits, Indonesia can look to models from India and Brazil, using local working requirements to drive innovation and technology transfer and to deter patent abuse by nonpracticing entities. By incorporating flexible mechanisms such as compulsory licensing instead of patent revocation for noncompliance, Indonesia can strike a balance between patent holder rights and national development goals, ultimately fostering a patent system that prioritizes public welfare and industrial progress.