Jurnal Persaingan Usaha
Analisis empiris atas kebijakan persaingan Studi kasus atau bedah putusan KPPU (yang telah inkracht) baik dalam konteks kegiatan yang dilarang, perjanjian yang dilarang, dan penyalahgunaan posisi dominan Analisis atas transaksi merger dan akuisisi, serta studi kasus penanganan perkara merger dan akuisisi Pengembangan regulasi dan hukum beracara di KPPU Studi komparatif implementasi hukum persaingan usaha antarnegara (antara KPPU dengan negara lain) Isu-isu yang berkaitan dengan kelembagaan KPPU (struktur dan kinerja) Diskursus dan kritik teori tentang persaingan usaha Pengembangan metodologi riset terkait persaingan usaha Isu-isu yang berkaitan dengan pengawasan kemitraan UMKM (termasuk implementasi konsep ekonomi pasar Pancasila, atau perdebatan antara competition dan cooperation)
Articles
35 Documents
<![CDATA[Peran Notaris dalam Mencegah Keterlambatan Notifikasi Perseroan kepada Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ]]>
<![CDATA[Siti Anisah]]>;
<![CDATA[Muhammad Zaky Ridho Subakti]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Persaingan Usaha Vol 2 No 1 (2022): Jurnal Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55869/kppu.v3i-.54
<![CDATA[Notaries play a very significant role in the company acquisition process, including preventing delays in notification of acquisitions to the Indonesian Competition Commission (KPPU). This issue is related to the substance of Article 128 of Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies and Article 1 of Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning Notary Positions. This research is a normative research supported by primary secondary and tertiary legal materials. The results show that notification of company acquisition is to prevent monopolistic practices and/or unfair competition. Such notification can be made starting from the acquisition plan by voluntarily conducting “consultation” until the mandatory notification time, which is 30 (thirty) days after the acquisition becomes legally effective. The Notary as a public official has the authority to make an authentic deed related to the acquisition, so that before ratifying the deed, the Notary can suggest to the company to conduct "consultation" first with KPPU.]]>
<![CDATA[Reformulasi Sistem Post Merger Notification untuk Menghindari Rechtvacuum Pembatalan Merger oleh KPPU ]]>
<![CDATA[Muhammad Fadhali Yusuf]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Persaingan Usaha Vol 2 No 2 (2022): Jurnal Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55869/kppu.v2i2.44
<![CDATA[ABSTRACT The Post-Merger Notification system implemented in Indonesia today is certainly still causing controversy and debate among practitioners and academics, considering that this system allows Notification of Merger transactions only after the Merger is carried out. When compared with other countries, there are differences that certainly affect the application of Antitrust Law, which in other countries have implemented the Pre-Merger Notification system. The author in this study tries to examine the legal vacuum that exists in the Post-Merger Notification system and formulates efforts to improve the Post-Merger system. The research method used is normative juridical, with a conceptual approach and a statutory approach. Then the results obtained from the research that KPPU prepares and harmonizes regulations and schemes to cancel the merger transaction of a company that has carried out the merger as well as arrangements regarding the Restoration of the Legal Status of the Companies resulting from the Cancellation of the Merger. This is done in order to provide legal certainty for Business Actors as well as to improve the legal vacuum in the enforcement of Antitrust Law. Keywords: Legal Vacuum, Merger, KPPU]]>
<![CDATA[Penguasaan dan Posisi Taward dalam Perjanjian Kemitraan: Sebuah Diskursus tentang “Penguasaan” dalam Perjanjian Kemitraan ]]>
<![CDATA[Kurnia Togar Pandapotan Tanjung]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Persaingan Usaha Vol 2 No 2 (2022): Jurnal Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55869/kppu.v2i2.56
<![CDATA[Kemitraan antara Usaha Mikro, Kecil dan Menengah (UMKM) dan Usaha Besar diyakini menjadi upaya signifikan untuk meningkatkan pertumbuhan UMKM dalam ekonomi nasional. Dalam dinamika hubungan yang asimetris dari segi skala ekonomi serta posisi tawar antara UMKM dan Usaha Besar dimungkinkan Usaha Besar melakukan pemilikan dan/atau penguasaan terhadap mitra UMKM. Pemilikan tentunya sudah jelas tercermin dari adanya kepemilikan berupa porsi saham hingga aset. Penguasaan sendiri belum memiliki definisi yang jelas. Penguasaan memungkinkan Usaha Besar untuk bertindak sesuai kepentingan subjektifnya dan tidak mengindahkan kepentingan UMKM seperti menetapkan klausula perjanjian kemitraan yang merugikan. Hal tersebut sejatinya dilarang dalam berbagai peraturan perundang-undangan tentang UMKM sebagai bentuk perlindungan terhadap UMKM sendiri. Salah satu diskursus yang bisa dikemukakan adalah mengatur larangan penguasaan tersebut dalam bentuk larangan penyalahgunaan posisi tawar dominan lewat rezim hukum persaingan usaha sebagaimana dilakukan oleh berbagai yurisdiksi.]]>
<![CDATA[Akibat Hukum Putusan KPPU Nomor 05/KPPU-M/2022 atas Keterlambatan Pengambilalihan Saham ]]>
<![CDATA[Arya Putra rizal]]>;
<![CDATA[Dimas Hikari]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Persaingan Usaha Vol 2 No 2 (2022): Jurnal Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55869/kppu.v2i2.59
<![CDATA[Legal effect of the KPPU's Decision in the case of alleged delay in the acquisition of shares of PT. Nabati Agro Subur by Lestari Gemilang Intisawit (Number: 05/KPPU-M/2022) aims to objectively see whether the decision of the Commission Council in the case of unfair business competition is in accordance with the rule of law through Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning Monopolistic Practices and Competition unhealthy business and sanctions in the form of fines for business actors who have failed to notify them of the notification of share takeover. In this examination of the decision as an input for law enforcement against unfair business competition violations that result in losses for other business actors in doing business in a healthy manner. This research uses a doctrinal research method with a conceptual approach and laws and regulations. Through this paper it can be concluded that Decision Number 05/KPPU-M/2022 explains that PT. Gemilang Lestari Intisawit as a Subsidiary that acquired PT. Nabati Agro Subur is obliged to notify the KPPU of the takeover of shares. PT.GLI as a subsidiary of PT. Bumitama (legal entity) and after investigating that the acquisition resulted in an excess of the asset value and sales value of the parent company. Decision Number 05/KPPU-M/2022 has not provided the maximum penalty and there is a visible disparity between the reported actions that harm other business actors and the fine that is imposed only 1 trillion rupiah]]>
<![CDATA[Isu Keberlanjutan dan Persaingan Usaha: Kapan Otoritas Harus Campur Tangan? ]]>
<![CDATA[Riris Munadiya]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Persaingan Usaha Vol 2 No 2 (2022): Jurnal Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55869/kppu.v2i2.66
<![CDATA[Abstract The issue of sustainable development has been a priority for the government and the world since the last few years. It is anticipated that Indonesia will achieve net zero emission by 2060. This big ambition is considered to require large funds, and business actors and the government are competing at different tempos. This acceleration needs to be balanced with the supervision of competition so that the process does not lead to a more concentrated market by large business actors who incidentally have the ability to achieve sustainable products. Supervision by this authority should be done at this time. On the other hand, competition law needs to take the right position so as not to create obstacles to the achievement of sustainable development goals.]]>
<![CDATA[Tantangan Penegakan Hukum Persaingan Usaha Pada Industri Perbankan Syariah ]]>
<![CDATA[Huta Disyon]]>;
<![CDATA[Fildzah Rio]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Persaingan Usaha Vol 2 No 2 (2022): Jurnal Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55869/kppu.v2i2.67
<![CDATA[Islamic Banking Law obliged business actors to take certain actions in order to create a stronger sharia banking industry. For example, the obligation to separate the Sharia Business Unit from the conventional parent bank and the minimum core capital requirement. To implement these regulations, Islamic banks may engage in several corporate actions, including spin-offs, mergers, and takeovers of business units. This research is intended to examine the potential violations of Law 5/1999 in the implementation of those Islamic bank corporate actions. The research method used is normative juridical, by reviewing Islamic Banking Law and Law 5/1999. According to the research, it has been determined a significant number of corporate actions in the Islamic banking sector would occur in 2023, necessitating increased attention from the KPPU, BI, and OJK to supervise these corporate actions in order to ensure healthy competition in the Islamic banking sector.]]>
<![CDATA[Kekuatan Pasar dan Stabilitas Dualisme Bank Perkreditan Rakyat Akibat Penetrasi Teknologi Finansial ]]>
<![CDATA[Moh Najikhul Fajri]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Persaingan Usaha Vol 2 No 2 (2022): Jurnal Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55869/kppu.v2i2.68
<![CDATA[The advancement of digital access conventional rural banks (BPR) and sharia rural banks (BPRS) compete with the presence of financial technology (fintech). Fintech penetration is projected to have an impact on market forces and credit risks of rural banks. By looking at this phenomenon, this research is directed to review the influence of penetration of financial technology institutions on the existence of market power and challenges of rural banks stability. Market power is measured using a non-structural approach, namely the Lerner Index. Meanwhile, banking stability is measured using non-performing loans. This research is using dynamic panel regression: generalized method of moments over 1,266 BPR and 113 BPRS during 2013-2019. The results show that fintech has a positive effect on market strength and negatively affects the stability of BPR/S. Fintech penetration provides resilience for the market strength of conventional and sharia rural banks through collaboration between institutions. Not only that, but economic growth is found to have brought market power even higher. On the other hand, the decline in banking stability was caused by the fact that rural banks and other rural banks did not open opportunities for cooperation, thereby increasing credit risk.]]>
<![CDATA[Urgensi Pembentukan Undang-Undang Pasar Digital sebagai Instrumen Pengawasan Persaingan Usaha di Era Digital ]]>
<![CDATA[Rohmat]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Persaingan Usaha Vol 2 No 2 (2022): Jurnal Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55869/kppu.v2i2.76
<![CDATA[Trading practices are changing as a result of the digital age. Trading operations that were once conducted in a conventional manner have transitioned to an online format. In the wake of the Covid-19 epidemic, there have been an increased number of developments in the digital industry. These actions have an impact on how the Business Competition Supervisory Commission implements business competition oversight (KPPU). Law enforcement against business operators in the digital market has not been made possible by Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition. The initial goal of this research is to identify and evaluate Indonesia's laws governing unfair competition in the digital market. Second, to examine KPPU's function in monitoring unfair business competition in the digital market. This study used a normative legal approach and a qualitative research design. Law Number 5 of 1999 Concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Rivalry contains the regulations governing unfair business competition in Indonesia. Indonesia has PP Number 80 of 2019 Concerning Trading Through Electronic Systems to Facilitate the Implementation of Trade Through Electronic Systems. Specifically against active foreign business players that have a detrimental impact on Indonesia, the KPPU's role in carrying out enforcement and monitoring in the digital market is less than ideal in practice. The creation of the Digital Market Law is urgently needed in order to implement extraterritorial principles and enhance KPPU's function.]]>
<![CDATA[Analisis Penguasaan Produksi Garam PT Garam (PERSERO) berdasarkan Prespektif Ketentuan Pengecualian ]]>
<![CDATA[Mochamad Cholil]]>;
<![CDATA[Rhido Jusmadi]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Persaingan Usaha Vol 3 No 1 (2023): Jurnal Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55869/kppu.v3i1.53
<![CDATA[Garam (Persero) is the only State-Owned Enterprise engaded in the oldest salt production and marketing industry in Republic of Indonesia. The existence of PT. Garam (Persero) as a business actor is suspected to dominate the national salt production. This becomes interesting to investigate because one form of action that can result in monopolistic practices and/or unfair business competition is control over the production and/or marketing of goods and/or services. Therefore, this research was conducted to determine the basic authority possessed by PT. Garam (Persero) in controlling salt production in Republic of Indonesia and analyzing whether the control of salt production carried out by PT. Garam (Persero) is a form of practice that is excluded or not in the provisions of Article 50 and Article 51 of Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practis and Unfair Business Competition. The research method used is the legal research. The approach taken is the statute approach. The results showed that PT. Garam (Persero) in controlling salt production in Republic of Indonesia has absolutely no basis of authority. In addition, the control of salt production carried out by PT. Garam (Persero) is a form of practice that is not excluded from the provisions of Article 50 and Article 51 of Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practis and Unfair Business Competition. Keywords: PT. Garam (Persero); control; salt]]>
<![CDATA[Analisis Dugaan Praktik Predatory Pricing dan Penyalahgunaan Posisi Dominan dalam Industri E-commerce ]]>
<![CDATA[Akhmad Farhan Nazhari]]>;
<![CDATA[Naufal Irkham]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Persaingan Usaha Vol 3 No 1 (2023): Jurnal Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55869/kppu.v3i1.85
<![CDATA[Abstract Digital trade activities in the form of e-commerce inseparable from the Covid-19 pandemic which has increased the number of users of e-commerce platforms. Unfortunately, this also poses challenges related to business competition, which are marked by some allegations regarding predatory pricing practices and/or abuse of dominant market position, as well as challenges in supervising business competition by KPPU. Therefore, the author will examine these challenges based on Law No. 5 of 1999 using normative juridical research method, as well as the hope that KPPU as quasi-institutional can make guidelines for supervising business competition in the market concerned of e-commerce. Keywords: e-commerce; dominant position; price discrimination; supervision.]]>
