Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
[ABSTRAK
Dari semua praktik bisnis yang tidak sehat, Kartel dipersepsikan sebagai bentuk paling berbahaya dari tidakan persaingan usaha karena para pelakunya sepakat melakukan konspirasi mengenai hal-hal yang bersifat sangat pokok dalam suatu transaksi bisnis. Kartel akan menyebabkan kerugian bagi konsumen. Sifat kerahasiaan kartel menjadi hambatan terbesar bagi otoritas persaingan usaha untuk membuktikkan eksistensi kartel, Indonesia juga mengalami hal tersebut. Untuk sejumlah alasan tersebut, beberapa negara di Barat menggunakan pendekatan per se illegal. Per se illegal memiliki beberapa keunggulan dibanding rule of reason dalam mengungkap keberadaan kartel. Tesis ini membahas mengenai pengaturan penerapan pendekatan per se illegal dalam Anti Monopoly Act (AMA) di Jepang dan The Regulation of Monopolies and Fair Trade Act (FTA) di Korea Selatan serta kemungkinan penerapan pendekatan per se illegal dalam hukum persaingan di Indonesia. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian yuridis normatif yang menggunakan metode pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan perbandingan. Hasil penelitian menyarankan untuk menerapkan ketentuan mengenai pendekatan per se illegal melalui amandemen Undang-undang Nomor 5 tahun 1999 sejalan dengan itu menambahkan kewenangan KPPU terkait penggeledahan.

---

ABSTRACT
From of all the unfair business practices, Cartel are perceived as the the most dangerous from of competitive business, because the principals agreed the conspiracy on matters that are staples in a business transaction. Cartel would cause harm to consumers. The confindential nature of cartel has been the biggest obstacle for the Competition authority?s effort to prove the existence of the cartel, Indonesia also experienced it. From some reasons, numerous jurisdictions have adopted approach of per se illegal. Per se illegal has several advantages compared to a rule of reason in expose the existence of cartel. This study discussed the rule on Anti Monopoly Act (AMA) in Japan and The Regulation of Monopolies and Fair Trade Act (FTA) in South Korea also addressed the possibility application Per Se illegal approach in Indonesia. The study used juridical-normative research method which emphasis on the use of statute and comparative approach. The result suggest to implement provisions concerning Per Se Illegal approach trough amandement Law Number 5 year 1999 and in line with the added KPPU?s authority related search and seizure.;From of all the unfair business practices, Cartel are perceived as the the most dangerous from of competitive business, because the principals agreed the conspiracy on matters that are staples in a business transaction. Cartel would cause harm to consumers. The confindential nature of cartel has been the biggest obstacle for the Competition authority?s effort to prove the existence of the cartel, Indonesia also experienced it. From some reasons, numerous jurisdictions have adopted approach of per se illegal. Per se illegal has several advantages compared to a rule of reason in expose the existence of cartel. This study discussed the rule on Anti Monopoly Act (AMA) in Japan and The Regulation of Monopolies and Fair Trade Act (FTA) in South Korea also addressed the possibility application Per Se illegal approach in Indonesia. The study used juridical-normative research method which emphasis on the use of statute and comparative approach. The result suggest to implement provisions concerning Per Se Illegal approach trough amandement Law Number 5 year 1999 and in line with the added KPPU?s authority related search and seizure.;From of all the unfair business practices, Cartel are perceived as the the most dangerous from of competitive business, because the principals agreed the conspiracy on matters that are staples in a business transaction. Cartel would cause harm to consumers. The confindential nature of cartel has been the biggest obstacle for the Competition authority?s effort to prove the existence of the cartel, Indonesia also experienced it. From some reasons, numerous jurisdictions have adopted approach of per se illegal. Per se illegal has several advantages compared to a rule of reason in expose the existence of cartel. This study discussed the rule on Anti Monopoly Act (AMA) in Japan and The Regulation of Monopolies and Fair Trade Act (FTA) in South Korea also addressed the possibility application Per Se illegal approach in Indonesia. The study used juridical-normative research method which emphasis on the use of statute and comparative approach. The result suggest to implement provisions concerning Per Se Illegal approach trough amandement Law Number 5 year 1999 and in line with the added KPPU?s authority related search and seizure.;From of all the unfair business practices, Cartel are perceived as the the most dangerous from of competitive business, because the principals agreed the conspiracy on matters that are staples in a business transaction. Cartel would cause harm to consumers. The confindential nature of cartel has been the biggest obstacle for the Competition authority?s effort to prove the existence of the cartel, Indonesia also experienced it. From some reasons, numerous jurisdictions have adopted approach of per se illegal. Per se illegal has several advantages compared to a rule of reason in expose the existence of cartel. This study discussed the rule on Anti Monopoly Act (AMA) in Japan and The Regulation of Monopolies and Fair Trade Act (FTA) in South Korea also addressed the possibility application Per Se illegal approach in Indonesia. The study used juridical-normative research method which emphasis on the use of statute and comparative approach. The result suggest to implement provisions concerning Per Se Illegal approach trough amandement Law Number 5 year 1999 and in line with the added KPPU?s authority related search and seizure.;From of all the unfair business practices, Cartel are perceived as the the most dangerous from of competitive business, because the principals agreed the conspiracy on matters that are staples in a business transaction. Cartel would cause harm to consumers. The confindential nature of cartel has been the biggest obstacle for the Competition authority?s effort to prove the existence of the cartel, Indonesia also experienced it. From some reasons, numerous jurisdictions have adopted approach of per se illegal. Per se illegal has several advantages compared to a rule of reason in expose the existence of cartel. This study discussed the rule on Anti Monopoly Act (AMA) in Japan and The Regulation of Monopolies and Fair Trade Act (FTA) in South Korea also addressed the possibility application Per Se illegal approach in Indonesia. The study used juridical-normative research method which emphasis on the use of statute and comparative approach. The result suggest to implement provisions concerning Per Se Illegal approach trough amandement Law Number 5 year 1999 and in line with the added KPPU?s authority related search and seizure., From of all the unfair business practices, Cartel are perceived as the the most dangerous from of competitive business, because the principals agreed the conspiracy on matters that are staples in a business transaction. Cartel would cause harm to consumers. The confindential nature of cartel has been the biggest obstacle for the Competition authority’s effort to prove the existence of the cartel, Indonesia also experienced it. From some reasons, numerous jurisdictions have adopted approach of per se illegal. Per se illegal has several advantages compared to a rule of reason in expose the existence of cartel. This study discussed the rule on Anti Monopoly Act (AMA) in Japan and The Regulation of Monopolies and Fair Trade Act (FTA) in South Korea also addressed the possibility application Per Se illegal approach in Indonesia. The study used juridical-normative research method which emphasis on the use of statute and comparative approach. The result suggest to implement provisions concerning Per Se Illegal approach trough amandement Law Number 5 year 1999 and in line with the added KPPU’s authority related search and seizure.]

Abstrak :
Praktik kartel dalam persaingan usaha seringkali sulit untuk diungkap keberadaannya, karena pada umumnya kartel dilakukan dengan kerahasiaan tingkat tinggi. Menanggapi hal tersebut, muncul leniency program yang pertama kali digagas oleh Antitrust Division Amerika Serikat sebagai suatu kebijakan pemberian insentif terhadap pelaku kartel yang mengakui keikutsertaannya dalam praktik kartel secara sukarela kepada otoritas persaingan usaha, yang kemudian diikuti oleh banyak yurisdiksi sebagai alat pengungkapan dan pembuktian kartel. Indonesia yang juga telah mengatur ketentuan leniency dalam RUU tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli UU No. 5 Tahun 1999 menemui sejumlah hambatan dalam proses penerapannya. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif yang menggunakan analisa kualitatif mengenai penerapan leniency program di Inggris, Korea selatan, Singapura, dan Australia. Desain pengaturan dan teknis pelaksanaan leniency program pada keempat negara tersebut dijadikan sebagai bahan rujukan terhadap rencana penerapan leniency program di Indonesia dan sekiranya dapat menjadi jalan keluar terhadap hambatan dalam penerapannya di Indonesia. ......Practice of cartels in competition law are difficult to detect, since cartels are generally carried out with high degree of confidentiality. In response, the US Antitrust Division initiated the leniency program as a policy of incentives for cartel actors who acknowledged their participation by voluntary to competition authorities, then it has followed by many jurisdictions as a means of disclosure and proof of cartels. Indonesia which has also regulated the leniency provisions in RUU tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli UU No. 5 Tahun 1999 encountered a number of obstacles in its implementation process. This study is a normative legal research using qualitative analysis of leniency program implementation in United Kingdom, South Korea, Singapore, and Australia. The regulatory and technical design of leniency program implementation in those countries are used as reference material to the plan of leniency implementation in Indonesia and if it can be a solution to obstacles in its application in Indonesia.

Abstrak :

Kartel adalah hal yang berbahaya, terutama di negara-negara berkembang karena kerusakan pada pasar sering diremehkan. Salah satu cara untuk penegakan hukuman bagi kartel adalah penerapan program keringanan hukuman. Dalam studi ini, implementasi program keringanan hukuman di Brasil, Cina, dan India akan dievaluasi, terutama mengenai tantangannya dalam pelaksanaan implementasi yang efektif. Hambatan di setiap negara diidentifikasi dengan menganalisis tiga pilar implementasi program keringanan hukuman yang efektif yang diberikan oleh Scott D. Hammond. Ketiga negara tersebut berhasil dalam memberi ancaman sanksi berat, meskipun masih berkembang dalam dua pilar lainnya yaitu risiko untuk terdeteksi dan transparansi dalam kebijakan penegakan hukum.

---

Cartels are harmful, especially in emerging countries because the damages to the market are underestimated. One of the means for cartel enforcement entails the implementation of a leniency program. In this study, the implementation of leniency programs in Brazil, China, and India will be evaluated, specifically its challenges in effective implementation. The obstacles in each country are identified by analyzing three cornerstones of effective leniency program implementation provided by Scott D. Hammond. Those three countries are successful in terms of inducing a threat of severe sanctions, although lacking in the two other cornerstones which are perceived risk of detection and transparency in enforcement policies.

Abstrak :
Pelaku usaha cenderungan untuk berusaha mempengaruhi harga baik melalui pengaturan kuota maupun melalui pemasaran produk barang dan/atau jasa pada pasar bersangkutan. Hal ini bertujuan untuk memperoleh keuntungan sebesar-besarnya. Bersama-sama dengan pesaing, pelaku usaha membuat perjanjian pengaturan kuota dan wilayah pemasaran produk pada pasar bersangkutan (perjanjian kartel). Hampir semua negara mengatur mengenai larangan perjanjian kartel tersebut. Dalam menganalisa kartel, terdapat dua macam pendekatan hukum persaingan usaha terhadap kartel yang dipergunakan, yaitu Per Se Illegal dan Rule of Reason. Dalam Antitrust Law Amerika Serikat, kartel diatur dalam Article 1 Sherman Act, dengan pendekatan Per Se Illegal. Sedangkan pengaturan kartel di Indonesia diatur dalam Pasal 11 Undang-undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 menggunakan pendekatan Rule of Reason, berdasarkan pada tujuan dari perjanjian kartel, yaitu bermaksud mempengaruhi harga. Pendekatan tersebut dipergunakan oleh KPPU dalam menganalisa dan memutuskan kasus kartel Tarif Kargo Surabaya-Makassar dan kasus Distribusi Semen Gresik. Hal ini menjadi kelemahan undang-undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 dalam pelaksanaan penegakkan kartel di Indonesia, karena Undang-undang tersebut menganalisa penegakkan kartel hanya berdasarkan dampaknya terhadap harga di pasar bersangkutan.

Abstrak :
Kartel adalah salah satu praktik anti persaingan yang dapat merugikan perekonomian, pelaku usaha, maupun konsumen. Kesulitan mengungkap praktik kartel di antara pelaku usaha adalah karena sifat kerahasiannya. Hal-hal tersebut menjadi alasan berlakunya leniency program di berbagai negara sebagai salah satu instrumen untuk membuktikan kartel. Penelitian ini akan membahas pengaturan leniency program di berbagai negara yaitu Amerika Serikat, Uni Eropa, Australia, dan Jepang serta penerapannya menurut hukum persaingan usaha Indonesia. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif yang menggunakan analisa kualitatif. Leniency program yang diatur dalam leniency policy di berbagai negara memiliki desain yang berbeda-beda disesuaikan dengan kebutuhan hukum masing-masing negara. Di Indonesia leniency program sempat diatur dalam Perkom No. 4 Tahun 2010 namun ketentuan mengenai leniency tersebut dicabut karena tidak ada landasan hukumnya. Untuk itu perlu dilakukan amandemen terhadap UU No. 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat sebagai payung hukum berlakunya leniency program sebagai salah satu pilihan instrumen pembuktian kartel di Indonesia.

---

Cartel is one of practices to restrict competition from economic loss that could harm entrepreneurs or even consumers. Difficulty in revealing cartel practice among entrepreneurs is due to its confidentiality which gave birth to leniency program enactment in several countries as an instrument to verify cartel. This research will discuss leniency program in several countries, such as United States, European Union, Australia and Japan, as well as its implementation according to competition law in Indonesia. This research is a normative legal research which uses qualitative analysis. In Indonesia, leniency program once regulated in KPPU Regulation Number 4 Year 2010, but it was revoked due to the absence of legal basis. Therefore Law Number 5 Year 1999 needs amendment as the umbrella act of leniency program enactment which acts as one of cartel verification instruments in Indonesia.

Abstrak :
Hukum Persaingan Usaha diciptakan untuk melindungi proses persaingan secara sehat dengan mencegah dan memberikan sanksi terhadap tindakan-tindakan yang bersifat anti persaingan. Kartel merupakan salah satu kegiatan yang merugikan perekonomian, hal ini dikarenakan para pelaku usaha anggota kartel akan setuju melakukan kegiatan yang berdampak pada pengendalian harga, sepertu pembatasan jumlah produksi. Kartel juga dapat menyebabkan ketidak efisienan dalam produksi ketika para anggotanya melindungi perusahaan yang tidak sehat, sehingga menaikkan biaya rata-rata produksi suatu barang barang atau jasa di pasar. Penelitian dalam penyusunan tesis ini mengacu pada teori tentang cita hukum, yaitu bahwa untuk menegakkan hukum harus memenuhi kriteria keadilan, kepastian hukum, dan kegunaan. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah normatif dengan teknik pengumpulan data kualitatif. Larangan Mengenai kartel diatur dalam Pasal 11 Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Yang Tidak Sehat. Putusan KPPU No. 10/KPPU-I/2015 Tentang Kartel Daging Sapi akan dianalisa kembali proses pembuktian dan penjatuhan sanksi administratifnya, bahwa telah dilakukan sesuai dengan mekanisme. Terdapat beberapa kelemahan dalam proses pembuktian, yaitu ketidakjelasan mengenai unsur perjanjian dan mempengaruhi harga dengan cara mengatur produksi. Perbedaan besaran sanksi tergantung pada besaran pangsa pasar dan kooperatifnya Terlapor selama proses pemeriksaan.

---

Competition Law protects competition and the healthy competition process by preventing and giving sanctions to the anti competition acts. Cartels are very detrimental to the economy because the business doers as the cartel members will agree to do activities having impact on price control, such as the limitation of production amount which will cause allocation ineficiency. Cartels are also can cause inefficiency in production when they protect inefficient factories so that they increase the costs of the production in average of a product or service in industry. The research method used in this thesis is normative while using qualitative data analysis method. Cartel agreement is set forth in Article 11 of the Law No. 5 of 1999. Commission Decision No. 10 KPPU I 2015 About Beef Cartel will be analyzed back in the process of investigation and imposition of administrative sanction, that has been done in accordance with the mechanism. There are some weaknesses in the investigation process, namely the lack of clarity regarding the elements of the agreement and influence prices by controling production. Differences in the amount of sanctions depending on the size and the market share Reported their cooperation during the investigation process.

Abstrak :
Skripsi ini membahas tentang dugaan praktik kartel kedelai impor yang dilakukan oleh beberapa perusahaan importir di Indonesia. Dugaan ini timbul setelah adanya tata niaga impor kedelai oleh Kementerian Perdagangan dengan dikeluarkannya Peraturan Menteri Perdagangan No. 45/M-DAG/PER/8/2013. Berdasarkan Surat Persetujuan Impor (SPI) yang diterbitkan, terlihat adanya pembagian kuota impor yang tidak proposional dimana terdapat tiga importir yang memiliki jatah impor melebihi 66 persen dari total kuota impor yang memberikan peluang sangat besar untuk dapat dilakukannya kartel yang melanggar ketentuan Pasal 11 Undang-Undang No. 5 Tahun 1999. Terlebih lagi dugaan ini diperkuat dengan adanya kelangkaan komoditas kedelai di pasar yang mengakibatkan melambungnya harga kedelai di Indonesia sekaligus tercatat sebagai harga kedelai termahal yang pernah ada. Namun pembuktian terjadinya praktik kartel bukanlah perkara yang mudah. Dituntut peran KPPU yang optimal dalam menjalankan fungsinya untuk membuktikan apakah benar terjadi kartel atau tidak.

---

This thesis analyzes the alleged of cartel practices of imported soybeans by some importer companies in Indonesia. These allegations arose after the Trade Ministry made a new trade system of imported soybeans by promulgating the regulation of the Minister of Trade No. 45/M-DAG/PER/8/2013. Based on a letter of approval to import, the division of the import quota to each importers is not propotional, where there were three importers who have more than 66 percent quota of the total import quota. That gives enormous opportunities to be able to do the cartels that violate the provisions of article 11 of Regulation Number 5 Year 1999. Moreover, these allegations were reinforced by the scarcity of soybeans commodity in the market that led to soaring price of soybean in Indonesia and also listed as the most expensive ever. But proving the cartel practices is not an easy matter. Optimal KPPU's role demands in carrying out its functions to prove whether or not the cartel does occur.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
ASEAN Economic Community AEC atau Masyarakat Ekonomi ASEAN MEA merupakan bentuk dari integrasi ekonomi yang mengintegrasikan ASEAN ke dalam satu pasar tunggal ASEAN. Hal ini akan meningkatkan aktivitas perdagangan internasional di Asia Tenggara sehingga persaingan akan semakin ketat. Namun kecenderungan para pelaku usaha melakukan monopoli dan persekongkolan sudah menjadi karakter pengusaha yang tidak ingin adanya pesaing, salah satunya dilakukan dalam bentuk kartel lintas batas. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif, penulis mengacu pada aturan hukum yang ada untuk menjawab masalah dalam penulisan ini. Kebijakan Perdagangan internasional akan menyulitkan terciptanya pengoperasian kartel yang efektif dikarenakan banyak hambatan yang terkikis dengan kebijakan-kebijakan yang dilakukan dalam rangka pengintegrasian pasar tunggal ASEAN ini. Sebagai upaya memerangi kartel lintas batas, kerja sama antara otoritas persaingan di berbagai yurisdiksi di ASEAN sangat dibutuhkan untuk keberhasilan penegakan hukum persaingan di pasar domestik, regional maupun internasional.

---

ABSTRACT
The ASEAN Economic Community AEC is a form of economic integration that integrates ASEAN into one ASEAN single market. This will increase the activity of international trade in Southeast Asia so that the competition will be tighter. However, the tendency of business actors to monopolize and conspiracy has become the character of entrepreneurs who do not want a competitor, one of which is done in the form of cross border cartel. By using normative legal research methods, the authors refer to the existing legal rules to answer the problem in this writing. International trade policy will make it difficult to create effective cartel operations due to the many obstacles eroded by the policies adopted in order to integrate this ASEAN single market. In an effort to combat the cross border cartel, cooperation between the competition authorities in various jurisdictions in ASEAN is urgently needed for the success of competition law enforcement in the domestic, regional and international markets.