Indonesia’s 2025 updates to its patent regime added a new compliance obligation that every patentee should now have on their calendar: filing an annual statement of implementation (often called a “working statement”). The duty comes from Article 20A of the amended Patent Law and is aimed at ensuring patents contribute to Indonesia’s economy rather than sitting dormant.

What the Rule requires

Under Article20A, all patent holders must submit a yearly report to the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) describing how the patented invention is being used in Indonesia. The report should indicate, for example, whether the invention is manufactured locally, licensed, or used via importation, and it should be supported by evidence (such as production records, licensing agreements, or import documents). Filing is due at the end of each calendar year.

Importantly, the obligation is broad in scope. Commentary from practice notes emphasizes that the annual statement applies to all active patents, not just those granted after the 2024 amendment took effect. That means legacy patents must be brought into compliance.

Where Things Stand Procedurally in 2025

While Indonesia is still finalizing detailed implementing regulations, DGIP has introduced a temporary online feature in its e-filing system, so patentees can submit their annual working statements. This gives companies a practical way to comply while awaiting formal guidance on the precise format and evidentiary standards.

Why Indonesia Added the Requirement

The reporting duty reflects a long-standing policy preference in Indonesia: patents should be “worked” to support domestic industry, technology transfer, and public welfare. Annual reporting gives the government visibility into whether and how inventions are commercialized in-country (or at least placed into licensed or import channels), and it discourages “patent blocking” that can stifle local innovation.

Consequences of Non-compliance

Legal updates caution that failure to file the annual statement may expose the patent to invalidation risks, with challenges potentially brought in the public interest. Even where revocation is not immediately at stake, not meeting the requirement could complicate future portfolio actions until the record is cleaned up. In short: treat the report as mandatory and time-sensitive.

Strategic Implications

For companies that manufacture outside Indonesia, licensing to a local partner or documenting compliant importation pathways may be the most efficient way to satisfy Article20A while building market presence. Conversely, rights owners with non-worked assets should reassess whether those patents support business objectives or need a plan (license, product launch, or divest) to mitigate risk. Either way, the annual report forces a portfolio-level conversation that can strengthen alignment between legal rights and commercial reality.

Conclusion

Indonesia’s annual implementation reporting is here, it’s substantive, and it has teeth. Treat it as a core part of your patent governance, build evidence trails throughout the year, and use DGIP’s online channel to stay ahead of deadlines. Doing so will protect valuable rights while keeping your organization in step with Indonesia’s evolving IP policy.