Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Dalam menghadapi perekonomian yang semakin global, Pemerintah menginginkan BUMN-BUMN memiliki daya saing. Untuk mewujudkan hal tersebut, upaya yang dilakukan Pemerintah adalah dengan mengeluarkan kebijakan yang mendorong terjadinya sinergi di antara BUMN, Anak Perusahaan BUMN, dan Perusahaan Terafiliasi BUMN. Kebijakan untuk mendorong terjadinya Sinergi BUMN tersebut, saat ini diterapkan oleh pemerintah melalui Peraturan Menteri BUMN Nomor: Per-15/MBU/2012. Sinergi yang dimaksud dalam peraturan tersebut pada dasarnya adalah dorongan untuk saling melakukan penunjukan langsung di antara BUMN, anak perusahaan dan perusahaan terafiliasinya. Terhadap hal tersebut, KPPU menilai Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN bertentangan dengan prinsip persaingan usaha yang utamanya tercermin dalam putusan dan saran atas perkara nomor 07/KPPU-I/2013.Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mengetahui bagaimana perspektif kebijakan dan ekonomi persaingan usaha terhadap Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN. Guna menjawab hal tersebut, penelitian ini akan melakukan analisis dengan menggunakan data kualitatif dan data kuantitatif dengan pembatasan studi pada industri jasa teknologi informasi. Data kualitatif dianalisis dengan menggunakan metode penelitian non-doctrinal legal research, sedangkan data kuantitatif dianalisis dengan cara melakukan perhitungan konsentrasi industri. Dari analisis kualitatif yang dilakukan, dapatlah disimpulkan bahwa secara material Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN memiliki beberapa kekurangan yang dapat berdampak terhadap kompetisi ataupun efisiensi. Kendati demikian, oleh karena secara legal formal Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN tetap dapat dilakukan maka diperlukan beberapa perbaikan dalam aturan pelaksanaannya sehingga Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN menjadi tidak berpotensi merugikan persaingan secara luas. Adapun dari pengolahan data kuantitatif yang dilakukan, dapat diketahui bahwa pada industri jasa teknologi informasi khususnya pasar data center services, Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN dapat berpotensi membatasi persaingan. Hal tersebut terlihat dari angka pertumbuhan kinerja pelaku usaha pesaing, meningkatnya penguasaan pasar dan rendahnya efisiensi Perusahaan Terafiliasi BUMN.

---

In the face of an increasing global economy, Government wants State-Owned Enterprises (SOE) to be more competitive. In order to realize that goal, Government made an effort by issuing policies that foster synergy among SOEs, its Subsidiaries, and Affiliated Companies of the SOE. Currently, policy to encourage business synergy between SOEs is implemented by the Government through SOE?s Minister Regulations No. Per-15 / MBU / 2012. Synergy that stipulated in the minister regulations is basically to permit and encourage procurement with direct appointment method among SOEs, its subsidiaries, and Affiliated Companies of the SOE. On the contrary, the Antitrust-Commission considers such kind of policy is against to the principles of competition. Such consideration was mainly reflected in the Commision?s verdicts and suggestion on case number 07 / KPPU-I / 2013.This research was conducted to determine how the perspective of antitrust economic and policy towards synergy of the SOEs. To answer this, this research performed analysis using quantitative and qualitative data. Such data is limited to the information technology services industry. Qualitative data was analyzed by using non-doctrinal legal research method, while quantitative data was analyzed by calculating industry concentration. From the qualitative analysis carried out, it can be concluded that the SOE? Synergy Policy contains some risks that can influence competition and efficiency. However, because SOE? Synergy Policy still can be legally implemented, some policy-improvements are needed to ensure that implementation of the policy will not harm competition. From the quantitative data processed, it can be known that competition in information technology services industry in particular market of data center services is potentially damaged by the SOE? Synergy Policy. This is evident from the performance of the competitors as well as market share and efficiency of Affiliated Companies of the SOE."

"[ABSTRAKDalam menghadapi perekonomian yang semakin global, Pemerintahmenginginkan BUMN-BUMN memiliki daya saing. Untuk mewujudkan hal tersebut, upaya yang dilakukan Pemerintah adalah dengan mengeluarkan kebijakan yang mendorong terjadinya sinergi di antara BUMN, Anak Perusahaan BUMN, dan Perusahaan Terafiliasi BUMN. Kebijakan untuk mendorong terjadinya Sinergi BUMN tersebut, saat ini diterapkan oleh pemerintah melalui Peraturan Menteri BUMN Nomor: Per-15/MBU/2012. Sinergi yang dimaksud dalam peraturan tersebut pada dasarnya adalah dorongan untuk saling melakukan penunjukan langsung di antara BUMN, anak perusahaan dan perusahaan terafiliasinya. Terhadap hal tersebut, KPPU menilai Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN bertentangan dengan prinsip persaingan usaha yang utamanya tercermin dalam putusan dan saran atas perkara nomor 07/KPPU-I/2013.Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mengetahui bagaimana perspektif kebijakan dan ekonomi persaingan usaha terhadap Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN. Guna menjawab hal tersebut, penelitian ini akan melakukan analisis dengan menggunakan data kualitatif dan data kuantitatif dengan pembatasan studi pada industri jasa teknologi informasi. Data kualitatif dianalisis dengan menggunakan metode penelitian non-doctrinal legal research, sedangkan data kuantitatif dianalisis dengan cara melakukan perhitungan konsentrasi industri. Dari analisis kualitatif yang dilakukan, dapatlah disimpulkan bahwa secara material Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN memiliki beberapa kekurangan yang dapat berdampak terhadap kompetisi ataupun efisiensi. Kendati demikian, oleh karena secara legal formal Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN tetap dapat dilakukan maka diperlukan beberapa perbaikan dalam aturan pelaksanaannya sehingga Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN menjadi tidakberpotensi merugikan persaingan secara luas. Adapun dari pengolahan data kuantitatif yang dilakukan, dapat diketahui bahwa pada industri jasa teknologi informasi khususnya pasar data center services, Kebijakan Sinergi BUMN dapat berpotensi membatasi persaingan. Hal tersebut terlihat dari angka pertumbuhan kinerja pelaku usaha pesaing, meningkatnya penguasaan pasar dan rendahnya efisiensi Perusahaan Terafiliasi BUMN.

---

ABSTRACTIn the face of an increasing global economy, Government wants State-Owned Enterprises (SOE) to be more competitive. In order to realize that goal, Government made an effort by issuing policies that foster synergy among SOEs, its Subsidiaries, and Affiliated Companies of the SOE. Currently, policy to encourage business synergy between SOEs is implemented by the Government through SOE?s Minister Regulations No. Per-15 / MBU / 2012. Synergy that stipulated in the minister regulations is basically to permit and encourage procurement with direct appointment method among SOEs, its subsidiaries, andAffiliated Companies of the SOE. On the contrary, the Antitrust Commission considers such kind of policy is against to the principles of competition. Such consideration was mainly reflected in the Commision verdicts and suggestion on case number 07 / KPPU-I / 2013.This research was conducted to determine how the perspective of antitrust economic and policy towards synergy of the SOEs. To answer this, this research performed analysis using quantitative and qualitative data. Such data is limited to the information technology services industry. Qualitative data was analyzed by using non-doctrinal legal research method, while quantitative data was analyzedby calculating industry concentration. From the qualitative analysis carried out, it can be concluded that the SOE? Synergy Policy contains some risks that can influence competition and efficiency. However, because SOE? Synergy Policystill can be legally implemented, some policy-improvements are needed to ensurethat implementation of the policy will not harm competition. From thequantitative data processed, it can be known that competition in informationtechnology services industry in particular market of data center services ispotentially damaged by the SOE? Synergy Policy. This is evident from theperformance of the competitors as well as market share and efficiency ofAffiliated Companies of the SOE.;In the face of an increasing global economy, Government wants State-OwnedEnterprises (SOE) to be more competitive. In order to realize that goal,Government made an effort by issuing policies that foster synergy among SOEs,its Subsidiaries, and Affiliated Companies of the SOE. Currently, policy toencourage business synergy between SOEs is implemented by the Governmentthrough SOE?s Minister Regulations No. Per-15 / MBU / 2012. Synergy thatstipulated in the minister regulations is basically to permit and encourageprocurement with direct appointment method among SOEs, its subsidiaries, andAffiliated Companies of the SOE. On the contrary, the Antitrust-Commissionconsiders such kind of policy is against to the principles of competition. Suchconsideration was mainly reflected in the Commision?s verdicts and suggestion oncase number 07 / KPPU-I / 2013.This research was conducted to determine how the perspective of antitrusteconomic and policy towards synergy of the SOEs. To answer this, this researchperformed analysis using quantitative and qualitative data. Such data is limited tothe information technology services industry. Qualitative data was analyzed byusing non-doctrinal legal research method, while quantitative data was analyzedby calculating industry concentration. From the qualitative analysis carried out, itcan be concluded that the SOE? Synergy Policy contains some risks that caninfluence competition and efficiency. However, because SOE? Synergy Policystill can be legally implemented, some policy-improvements are needed to ensurethat implementation of the policy will not harm competition. From thequantitative data processed, it can be known that competition in informationtechnology services industry in particular market of data center services ispotentially damaged by the SOE? Synergy Policy. This is evident from theperformance of the competitors as well as market share and efficiency ofAffiliated Companies of the SOE.;In the face of an increasing global economy, Government wants State-OwnedEnterprises (SOE) to be more competitive. In order to realize that goal,Government made an effort by issuing policies that foster synergy among SOEs,its Subsidiaries, and Affiliated Companies of the SOE. Currently, policy toencourage business synergy between SOEs is implemented by the Governmentthrough SOE?s Minister Regulations No. Per-15 / MBU / 2012. Synergy thatstipulated in the minister regulations is basically to permit and encourageprocurement with direct appointment method among SOEs, its subsidiaries, andAffiliated Companies of the SOE. On the contrary, the Antitrust-Commissionconsiders such kind of policy is against to the principles of competition. Suchconsideration was mainly reflected in the Commision?s verdicts and suggestion oncase number 07 / KPPU-I / 2013.This research was conducted to determine how the perspective of antitrusteconomic and policy towards synergy of the SOEs. To answer this, this researchperformed analysis using quantitative and qualitative data. Such data is limited tothe information technology services industry. Qualitative data was analyzed byusing non-doctrinal legal research method, while quantitative data was analyzedby calculating industry concentration. From the qualitative analysis carried out, itcan be concluded that the SOE? Synergy Policy contains some risks that caninfluence competition and efficiency. However, because SOE? Synergy Policystill can be legally implemented, some policy-improvements are needed to ensurethat implementation of the policy will not harm competition. From thequantitative data processed, it can be known that competition in informationtechnology services industry in particular market of data center services ispotentially damaged by the SOE? Synergy Policy. This is evident from theperformance of the competitors as well as market share and efficiency ofAffiliated Companies of the SOE.;In the face of an increasing global economy, Government wants State-OwnedEnterprises (SOE) to be more competitive. In order to realize that goal,Government made an effort by issuing policies that foster synergy among SOEs,its Subsidiaries, and Affiliated Companies of the SOE. Currently, policy toencourage business synergy between SOEs is implemented by the Governmentthrough SOE?s Minister Regulations No. Per-15 / MBU / 2012. Synergy thatstipulated in the minister regulations is basically to permit and encourageprocurement with direct appointment method among SOEs, its subsidiaries, andAffiliated Companies of the SOE. On the contrary, the Antitrust-Commissionconsiders such kind of policy is against to the principles of competition. Suchconsideration was mainly reflected in the Commision?s verdicts and suggestion oncase number 07 / KPPU-I / 2013.This research was conducted to determine how the perspective of antitrusteconomic and policy towards synergy of the SOEs. To answer this, this researchperformed analysis using quantitative and qualitative data. Such data is limited tothe information technology services industry. Qualitative data was analyzed byusing non-doctrinal legal research method, while quantitative data was analyzedby calculating industry concentration. From the qualitative analysis carried out, itcan be concluded that the SOE? Synergy Policy contains some risks that caninfluence competition and efficiency. However, because SOE? Synergy Policystill can be legally implemented, some policy-improvements are needed to ensurethat implementation of the policy will not harm competition. From thequantitative data processed, it can be known that competition in informationtechnology services industry in particular market of data center services ispotentially damaged by the SOE? Synergy Policy. This is evident from theperformance of the competitors as well as market share and efficiency ofAffiliated Companies of the SOE., In the face of an increasing global economy, Government wants State-OwnedEnterprises (SOE) to be more competitive. In order to realize that goal,Government made an effort by issuing policies that foster synergy among SOEs,its Subsidiaries, and Affiliated Companies of the SOE. Currently, policy toencourage business synergy between SOEs is implemented by the Governmentthrough SOE’s Minister Regulations No. Per-15 / MBU / 2012. Synergy thatstipulated in the minister regulations is basically to permit and encourageprocurement with direct appointment method among SOEs, its subsidiaries, andAffiliated Companies of the SOE. On the contrary, the Antitrust-Commissionconsiders such kind of policy is against to the principles of competition. Suchconsideration was mainly reflected in the Commision’s verdicts and suggestion oncase number 07 / KPPU-I / 2013.This research was conducted to determine how the perspective of antitrusteconomic and policy towards synergy of the SOEs. To answer this, this researchperformed analysis using quantitative and qualitative data. Such data is limited tothe information technology services industry. Qualitative data was analyzed byusing non-doctrinal legal research method, while quantitative data was analyzedby calculating industry concentration. From the qualitative analysis carried out, itcan be concluded that the SOE’ Synergy Policy contains some risks that caninfluence competition and efficiency. However, because SOE’ Synergy Policystill can be legally implemented, some policy-improvements are needed to ensurethat implementation of the policy will not harm competition. From thequantitative data processed, it can be known that competition in informationtechnology services industry in particular market of data center services ispotentially damaged by the SOE’ Synergy Policy. This is evident from theperformance of the competitors as well as market share and efficiency ofAffiliated Companies of the SOE.]"

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai kebijakan Badan Usaha Milik Negara (BUMN) yang memberikan penugasan kepada Anak Perusahaan untuk melaksanakan suatu pekerjaan berdasarkan ketentuan Sinergi BUMN. Sebagai pelaku usaha, dalam menjalankan kegiatan usahanya BUMN diwajibkan untuk tetap tunduk pada Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat (UU Anti Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat). Periode tahun 2012-2014, PLN dihadapkan dengan berbagai masalah tenaga kerja alih daya akibat banyaknya PHK dan pemotongan hak normatif pekerja alih daya yang dilakukan oleh perusahaan penerima pemborongan di PLN. Faktor utama penyebab permasalahan tersebut adalah adanya perang harga pada proses tender pengadaan barang / jasa yang menyebabkan harga pemenang tender tidak dapat lagi memenuhi hak normatif tenaga kerja, serta vendor lama yang kalah tender harus melakukan PHK kepada pekerjanya. Hal ini akhirnya berdampak pada terganggunya pelayanan operasi dan pemeliharaan distribusi dan transmisi kepada pelanggan PLN. Untuk menyelesaikan permasalahan tersebut PLN membentuk anak perusahaan PT HP untuk ditugaskan mengamankan layanan operasi dan pemeliharaan transmisi dan distribusi tenaga listrik. Strategi penugasan ini diduga telah menimbulkan persaingan usaha tidak sehat oleh PLN dan PT HP. Dengan corak pasar oligopsoni, PLN diduga telah melakukan penetapan harga, menghambat masuknya pelaku usaha lain ke pasar yang bersangkutan dan melakukan persekongkolan tender dengan PT HP. Dengan dasar hukum Sinergi BUMN yang diatur dalam PERMEN BUMN Nomor PER-05/MBU/2008 tentang Pedoman Pengadaan Barang dan Jasa BUMN, penugasan PLN kepada PT HP termasuk perbuatan yang dikecualikan dari pemberlakuan UU Anti Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 50 huruf a UU Anti Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat.

---

This thesis discuss about the policy of State-Owned Enterprises (SOE) on assignment to the subsidiary to carry out a job under the provisions of SOE Synergy. As a business, in operation SOEs are obliged to remain subject to the Law No. 5 Year 1999 regarding Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition (The Law of Antirust and Unfair Competition). In 2012 to 2014, PLN confronted with various problems of outsourcing labor due to layoffs and cuts in workers normative rights of outsourcing undertaken by the vendor companies in PLN. The main factors of this problem are the war pricing in the procurement process, hence the price of the winner bidder could not fulfill workers basic rights. Furthermore, the existing company that lost the bid must layoffs its workers. Finally, those conditions disrupt transmission and distribution operation and maintenance services to PLN?s customers. To resolve these issues, PLN establish a subsidiary called PT HP to assigned for securing the operation and maintenance of transmission and distribution of electricity. This assignment strategy alleged to constitute unfair competition by PLN and PT HP. With oligopolistic market, PLN alleged to have committed pricing, barrier to relevant market entry and tender conspiracy with PT HP. Institutes by SOE Synergy regulated in SOE Minister Regulation No. PER-05/MBU/2008 regarding Guidelines for SOE Procurement of Goods and Services, assignment from PLN to PT HP includes acts that are excluded from the application of the Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law as provided in Letter a Article 50 The Law of Antirust and Unfair Competition."

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai penunjukan langsung anak perusaan BUMN ditinjau dari perspektif Hukum Persaingan Usaha. Sebagai salah satu bentuk pengadaan barang dan jasa, penunjukan langsung anak perusahaan memiliki potensi terjadinya pelanggaran terhadap prinsip-prinsip persaingan usaha yang sehat apabila tidak mematuhi aturan yang berlaku.Peraturan Presiden No.04 Tahun 2015 mengatur proses pengadaan barang dan jasa untuk penunjukan langsung. Selanjutnya Peraturan Menteri BUMN No. PER-15/MBU/2012 mengatur proses pengadaan barang dan jasa untuk penunjukan langsung. Aturan-aturan yang berlaku atas BUMN tersebut menimbulkan intepretasi terhadap BUMN sebagai pelaku usaha. BUMN adalah Badan Usaha yang modalnya dimiliki oleh negara melalui penyertaan secara langsung yang berasal dari kekayaan negara yang dipisahkan. Maka anak perusahaan BUMN tunduk kepada beberapa peraturan yang menjadi pedoman dalam pengadaan barang dan jasa. Penelitian ini membahas aspek hukum penunjukan langsung dalam pengadaan barang dan jasa ditinjau dari hukum persaingan usaha. Sehingga penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan beberapa peraturan perundang-undangan yang terkait hukum persaingan usaha seperti Undang Undang No. 5 tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat, Undang Undang No. 19 Tahun 2003 tentang Badan Usaha Milik Negara, Undang Undang No. 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas dan peraturan-peraturan lainnya seperti peraturan Kementrian BUMN. Analisa dilakukan dengan membandingkan fakta-fakta yang ada dengan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan yang berlaku di Indonesia serta teori-teori dari para ahli hukum mengenai masalah yang bersangkutan.

---

This thesis discusses about the direct appointment of the subsidiary company of Pertamina as one of the Indonesian State Owned Entity according to perspective of competition law. If the direct appointment conducted without highly consideration of the law, it has the potential to against the principles of fair competition such as rigging or discrimination which create barriers to other company to compete in the procurement goods and services. Presidential Regulation No. 04 of 2010 regulates the process of procurement of goods / services, whether in the form of a direct appointment. Further, Ministry of State-Owned Entities regulation No. 15 of 2012 regulates the process of procurement of goods / services, whether in the form of a direct appointment. These regulations has create multi interpretation of State Owned Entity as an actor in national economy. State Owned Entity has its capital owned by the state through direct participation that is derived from the state?s separated assets which caused it comply to several regulations as its guideline to run its business including in goods and services procurement. This thesis discusses the legal aspects of procurement through direct procurement mechanism in terms of antitrust law so that the research method uses a normative juridical legislation related antitrust law such as Law No. 5 Year 1999 concerning Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Competition, Law No. 19 of 2003 Concerning State-Owned Entities, Law No. 40 of 2007 Concerning Limited Liability Company and other regulations such as regulations from Ministry of State-Owned Entities. The analyzes were performed by comparing the facts that there is a Regulatory Legislation in force in Indonesia as well as the theories of legal experts on the matter in question."

"Negara memiliki kewajiban untuk memenuhi hak kesejahteraan masyarakat dengan memanfaatkan hak yang diberikan kepada suatu pemerintahan. Pada tahun 2019, Pemerintah Indonesia memperkenalkan perusahaan holding BUMN dalam sektor pertambangan mineral dan batubara yaitu Mining Industri Indonesia (“MIND ID”) yang bergerak dengan menjalankan 2 (dua) fungsi sekaligus yaitu fungsi sebagai strategic holding dan fungsi operasional peleburan alumunium. Pembentukan MIND ID dilaksanakan atas amanat dari Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 47 Tahun 2017 yang mendasari penyertaan modal Namun, hingga saat ini keberadaan dan pembentukan holding company belum diatur dalam peraturan perundang-undangan di Indonesia. Pembentukan dari sebuah holding company berkaitan erat dengan adanya kemungkinan terjadinya sebuah bentuk-bentuk kegiatan dan perjanjian yang dapat menimbulkan persaingan usaha tidak sehat, salah satunya adalah kegiatan monopoli dan perjanjian trust. Oleh karena itu, Penulis akan membahas peristiwa tersebut dengan tujuan untuk menambah pengetahuan terhadap potensi adanya praktik persaingan usaha tidak sehat dalam pembentukan holding company dalam sektor pertambangan mineral dan batubara yang diatur dalam UU Nomor 5 Tahun 1999. Dengan menganalisis dugaan tersebut, Penulis menggunakan bentuk penelitian yuridis-normatif dengan tipologi deskriptif analitis, sehingga Penulis akan mendeskripsikan dan memberikan gambaran mengenai dugaan praktik monopoli dan pelaksanaan perjanjian trust dalam pembentukan perusahaan holding BUMN dalam sektor mineral dan batubara berdasarkan ketentuan UU Nomor 5 Tahun 1999. Hasil penelitian adalah pembentukan holding company BUMN di sektor pertambangan mineral dan batubara telah dilaksanakan sesuai ketentuan dan pembentukannya tidak dapat dikategorikan sebagai pelanggaran terhadap ketentuan hukum persaingan usaha. Dalam menyelenggarakan kegiatan usahanya, holding BUMN pertambangan tetap tunduk terhadap ketentuan UU Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 dan peraturan turunannya, serta tetap menjadi objek pengawasan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha.

---

The state has an obligation to fulfill the right to social welfare by utilizing the rights granted to a government. In 2019, the Government of Indonesia introduced a State Owned Enterprise's (“SOE’s”) Holding Company in the mineral and coal mining sector, namely Mining Industri Indonesia ("MIND ID") which operates by carrying out 2 (two) functions at once, namely the strategic holding function and the operational function of aluminum smelting. The formation of MIND ID was carried out based on the mandate of Government Regulation Number 47 of 2017 which underlies capital participation. However, until now the existence and formation of a holding company has not been regulated in Indonesian laws and regulations. The formation of a holding company is closely related to the possibility of various forms of activity and agreements that can lead to unfair business competition, one of which is monopoly activities and trust agreements. Therefore, the author will discuss these events with the aim of increasing knowledge of the potential for unfair business competition practices in the formation of holding companies in the mineral and coal mining sector which are regulated in Law Number 5 of 1999. By analyzing these allegations, the author uses the form of research juridical-normative with an analytical descriptive typology, so that the author will describe and provide an overview of alleged monopolistic practices and implementation of trust agreements in the formation of SOE’s holding company in the mineral and coal sector based on the provisions of Law Number 5 of 1999. The results of this research are the establishment of BUMN holding companies in the mining sector mineral and coal mining has been carried out in accordance with the provisions and its formation cannot be categorized as a violation of the provisions of business competition law. In carrying out its business activities, mining SOE’s holding company remains subject to the provisions of Law Number 5 of 1999 and its derivative regulations, and remain the object of supervision of the Business Competition Supervisory Commission."

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai pengaturan hukum persaingan usaha mengenaipenetapan harga dan kartel melalui tinjauan yuridis terhadap Putusan No.15/KPPU-I/2019 Dan Putusan Pengadilan Negeri 365/Pdt. Sus-KPPU/2020/PnJkt.Pst Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis-normatif menggunakan dataprimer dan sekunder. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa Para Terlapor dalamkasus ini telah melakukan perjanjian melalui concerted action (meeting of theminds) sehingga memenuhi unsur penetapan harga dalam pasal 5 Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999, namun tidak memenuhi unsur kartel dalam pasal 11.

---

This Thesis Defense will analyze the use of Indonesian Antitrust Laws regarding Price fixing and Cartel Allegations through Decision Number 15/KPPU-I/2019 and State Court Decision Number 365/Pdt. Sus-KPPU/2020/Pn Jkt.Pst . This research uses the juridicial normative method and also secondary data. Research found that Para Terlapor in this case is guilty of using price fixing through concerted action

(meeting of the minds), therefore fulfilling article 5 in Law Number 5 year 1999. This case however does not fulfil article 11 in in Law Number 5 year 1999."

"Penggabungan usaha atau megjer merupakan salah satu strategi perusahaan untuk memacu pertumbuhan perusahaan dan meningkatkan nilai untuk pemegang saham. Potensi penambahan nilai bagi pemegang saham dapat terjadi apabila terdapat sinergis dari penggabungan usaha tersebut, dimana nilai perusahaan gabungan lebih besar dari pada jumiah nilai masing-masing perusahaan apabila kedua perusahaan tersebut beroperasi scbagai dua entitas bisnis yang berbeda.Menilik dari kondisi-kondisi yang dialami cleh PT Multistrada ArahSarana Tbk ("MASA'") dan PT Prasidha Aneka Niaga Tbk ("PSDN"), dimana PSDN sedang mengalami kesulitan keuangan namun memiliki prospek masih baik, sedangkan MASA memerlukan kepastian pasokan bahan baku untuk menunjang kontinuitas produksinya. maka mejer merupakan salah satu wacana yang dapat dipertimbangkan baik oleh manajemen maupun pemegang mayoritas kedua perusahaan untuk meningkatkan nilai perusahaanLangkah yang harus dilakukan sebelum melakukan merjer adalah dengan melakukan evaluasi secara menyeluruh perusahaan yang akan diakuisisi serta melakukan penilaian terhadap pcrusahaan sehingga diperoleh harga akuisisi yang layak.Untuk mencari nilai sinergi yang terjadi dari penggabungan usaha tersebut, dilakukan valuasi terhadap nilai masing-masing perusahaan scbagai entitas bisnis tersendiri dan valuasi nilai perusahaan pasca meger. Nilai sinergi diperoleh dengan mencari selisih nilai perusahaan pasca merjer dan nilai total kedua perusahaan sebelum merjer

---

Business mergers or mergers are one of the company's strategies to spur company growth and increase shareholder value. The potential for additional value for shareholders can occur if there is a synergy from the merger, where the value of the combined company is greater than the total value of each company if the two companies operate as two different business entities.

Judging from the conditions experienced by PT Multistrada Arah Sarana Tbk ("MASA'") and PT Prasidha Aneka Niaga Tbk ("PSDN"), where PSDN is experiencing financial difficulties but has good prospects, while MASA requires certainty in the supply of raw materials to support the continuity of production. then the merger is one discourse that can be considered by both the management and the majority holders of the two companies to increase the value of the company.

The step that must be taken before carrying out a merger is to conduct a thorough evaluation of the company to be acquired and conduct an assessment of the company in order to obtain a reasonable acquisition price.

To find the value of the synergy that occurs from the business merger, an evaluation of the value of each company as a separate business entity is carried out and the valuation of the post-merger company value. The synergy value is obtained by finding the difference between the post-merger company value and the total value of the two companies before the merger"

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai pembentukan holding company BUMN yang ditinjau dari hukum persaingan usaha. Salah satu holding company BUMN yang telah terbentuk adalah PT Pupuk Indonesia (Persero). Perlu diselaraskan antara pembentukan holding company BUMN dengan prosedur yang diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat serta dilakukan penelitian terhadap dampak hukum yang mungkin timbul dengan dibentuknya holding company BUMN pupuk. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kepustakaan yang dilakukan dengan menggunakan tipologi penelitian yuridis normatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa pembentukan holding company BUMN di Indonesia saat ini masih memiliki banyak kekurangan seperti tidak dilakukannya proses notifikasi dan masih berpotensi menimbulkan inefisiensi pendistribusian pupuk. Sehingga dibutuhkan kerjasama antara pemerintah, KPPU dan pelaku usaha agar pelaksanaan prosedur notifikasi sesuai dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999.

---

The focus on this study discuss about establishment of holding company of state owned enterprise for fertilizers, named PT Pupuk Indonesia (Persero), from the perspective of Indonesia anti monopoly and competition law. Therefore, the establishment of holding company need to be synchronized with the Law Number 5 of 1999 Corncerning The Ban on Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition and the impact that might be arise. This study is library research, which is done by using the tipology of juridical normative research. The result of this study shows that an establishment of state owned enterprise of holding company for fertilizers have not fulfilled the notification requirement and potentially cause inefficiency of the fertilizers distribution. Therefore, the cooperation between government, KPPU, and entrepreneurs is needed so that the notification requirement stratifies the Law Number 5 of 1999 Corncerning The Ban on Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition."