CONSUMER PROTECTION IN CRYPTO ASSETS: COMPARATIVE LEGAL FRAMEWORKS AND PRACTICES IN INDONESIA AND MALAYSIA

Abstrak

This study begins by situating crypto assets in Indonesia and Malaysia as fast-growing, high-risk markets that demand consumer protection calibrated to innovation. It aims to compare how each jurisdiction safeguards retail users by examining regulatory architecture, market mechanics, and dispute resolution pathways, while pinpointing remaining policy gaps. Using a normative legal method, it analyzes statutes, regulatory guidelines, and supervisory practice, contrasting Indonesia’s transition from Bappebti to the Financial Services Authority OJK under the P2SK framework, PP 49/2024, POJK 27/2024, and SEOJK 20/2024 with Malaysia’s capital markets approach anchored in the 2019 Prescription Order and the Guidelines on Recognised Markets. The analysis finds broad convergence on client asset segregation, governance and conduct standards, AML/CFT controls, risk disclosures, and the availability of non-litigation redress, as seen in LAPS SJK in Indonesia and SIDREC in Malaysia, with a 90-day target. Indonesia’s exchange clearing custody stack strengthens safeguards but still leaves gaps, including inconsistent delineation of “consumer” and incomplete risk mitigation or insurance requirements for assets retained by dealers. Malaysia’s digital asset exchanges operate as Recognised Market Operators with transparent whitelists and blacklists, and maturing gatekeeper obligations. The study concludes that Indonesia should close its insurance and mitigation gap, harmonize the consumer definition with general consumer law, centralize authorization lists, and sharpen listing governance. Meanwhile, Malaysia should continue to strike a balance between streamlined listings and robust gatekeeping to maintain trust and resilience in retail crypto markets.