JURIDICAL ANALYSIS OF PRICE FIXING AS UNFAIR BUSINESS COMPETITION
Main Article Content
Henry Aspan
Etty Sri Wahyuni
Ari Prabowo
Ami Natuz Zahara
Price fixing is one of the prohibited agreements under competition law due to its inherently anti-competitive nature and harm to consumers. This research aims to analyze price fixing regulations under Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition, focusing on the application of per se illegal approach, evidence using indirect evidence, and law enforcement challenges in Indonesia. The research method used is normative juridical with statutory, conceptual, and case study approaches. The results show that price fixing is regulated under Article 5 of Law No. 5 of 1999 with a per se illegal approach that does not require proof of impact. However, in practice, the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) often faces difficulties in proof as business actors tend to avoid written agreements. The use of indirect evidence consisting of economic and communication evidence has become an increasingly developed alternative proof. This research recommends strengthening regulations regarding the position of indirect evidence and enhancing KPPU's capacity in economic analysis for effective competition law enforcement.
Aminah, S. (2023). Kedudukan bukti tidak langsung (indirect evidence) dalam penyelesaian praktik kartel di Indonesia. Dharmasisya: Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI, 2(3), Article 34.
Anggraini, A. M. T. (2003). Larangan praktek monopoli dan persaingan tidak sehat: Per se illegal atau rules of reason. Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia.
Anggraini, A. M. T. (2005). Penerapan pendekatan 'rule of reason' dan 'per se illegal' dalam hukum persaingan. Jurnal Hukum Bisnis, 24(2), 5-18.
Business Competition Supervisory Commission of the Republic of Indonesia. (2011). Regulation Number 4 of 2011 on Guidelines for Article 5 (Price Fixing) [Peraturan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Nomor 4 Tahun 2011 tentang Pedoman Pasal 5 (Penetapan Harga)].
Business Competition Supervisory Commission of the Republic of Indonesia. (2016). Decision Number 04/KPPU-I/2016 on Alleged Violation of Article 5 of Law No. 5/1999 in the Motorcycle Industry [Putusan KPPU Nomor 04/KPPU-I/2016 tentang Dugaan Pelanggaran Pasal 5 UU No. 5/1999 dalam Industri Sepeda Motor].
Business Competition Supervisory Commission of the Republic of Indonesia. (2018). Decision Number 08/KPPU-L/2018 on Freight Container Price Cartel [Putusan KPPU Nomor 08/KPPU-L/2018 tentang Kartel Harga Freight Container].
Business Competition Supervisory Commission of the Republic of Indonesia. (2019a). Decision Number 15/KPPU-I/2019 on Airline Ticket Cartel [Putusan KPPU Nomor 15/KPPU-I/2019 tentang Kartel Tiket Pesawat].
Business Competition Supervisory Commission of the Republic of Indonesia. (2019b). Regulation Number 1 of 2019 on Procedures for Handling Cases of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition [Peraturan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Nomor 1 Tahun 2019 tentang Tata Cara Penanganan Perkara Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat].
Business Competition Supervisory Commission of the Republic of Indonesia. (2022). Decision Number 15/KPPU-I/2022 on Alleged Cooking Oil Cartel [Putusan KPPU Nomor 15/KPPU-I/2022 tentang Dugaan Kartel Minyak Goreng].
Business Competition Supervisory Commission of the Republic of Indonesia. (2023). Regulation Number 6 of 2023 on Revocation of Business Competition Supervisory Commission Regulation Number 1 of 2019 [Peraturan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Nomor 6 Tahun 2023 tentang Pencabutan Peraturan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Nomor 1 Tahun 2019].
Damaryanti, H., et al. (2017). Penerapan pendekatan per se illegal dalam pemeriksaan kasus penetapan harga berdasarkan UU No. 5 Tahun 1999. Jurnal Fakultas Hukum Universitas Panca Bhakti Pontianak, 4(1).
Fajari, R. A., & Afriana, A. (2019). Penggunaan economic evidence sebagai alat bukti oleh Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha. Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum, 3(2).
Gellhorn, E., & Kovacic, W. E. (1994). Antitrust law and economics in a nutshell. West Publishing.
Ginting, E. R. (2001). Hukum anti monopoli Indonesia: Analisis dan perbandingan UU Nomor 5 Tahun 1999. Citra Aditya Bakti.
Kagramanto, L. B. (2008a). Larangan persekongkolan tender: Perspektif hukum persaingan usaha. Srikandi.
Kagramanto, L. B. (2008b). Mengenal hukum persaingan usaha. Laros.
Lubis, A. F., & Sirait, N. N. (Eds.). (2009). Hukum persaingan usaha: Antara teks dan konteks. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH.
Mulyadi, D., & Rusydi, I. (2017). Efektivitas peran Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (KPPU) dalam penanganan kasus persaingan usaha tidak sehat. Jurnal Hukum, 5.
Nugroho, S. A. (2018). Hukum persaingan usaha di Indonesia: Dalam teori dan praktik serta penerapan hukumnya. Prenadamedia Group.
Panatagama, A. (2020). Actio Pauliana dalam kepailitan yang melebihi jangka waktu satu tahun. Jurist-Diction, 3(4).
Pompe, S., et al. (Eds.). (2010). Ikhtisar ketentuan hukum persaingan usaha. The Indonesia Netherlands National Legal Reform.
Puspaningrum, G. (2013). Hukum persaingan usaha: Perjanjian dan kegiatan yang dilarang dalam hukum persaingan usaha di Indonesia. Aswaja Pressindo.
Republic of Indonesia. (1999). Law Number 5 of 1999 on the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition [Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat]. State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1999 Number 33.
Rokan, M. K. (2012). Hukum persaingan usaha: Teori dan praktiknya di Indonesia. Rajawali Press.
Silalahi, U., & Edgina, I. C. (2017). Pembuktian perkara kartel di Indonesia dengan menggunakan bukti tidak langsung. Jurnal Yudisial, 10(3).
Simbolon, A. (2013). Pendekatan yang dilakukan Komisi Persaingan Usaha menentukan pelanggaran dalam hukum persaingan usaha. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, 2(2).
Siswanto, A. (2004). Hukum persaingan usaha. Ghalia Indonesia.
Supianto. (2013). Pendekatan per se illegal dan rule of reason dalam hukum persaingan usaha di Indonesia. Jurnal Rechtens, 2(1).
Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. (2022). Cassation Decision Number 1811 K/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2022 [Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1811 K/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2022].
Widhiyanti, H. N. (2015). Pendekatan per se illegal dan rule of reason dalam hukum persaingan (Perbandingan Indonesia-Malaysia). Arena Hukum, 8(3), 385-410.
Wulandari, R. T. (2022). Perbedaan penerapan pendekatan per se illegal dan rule of reason dalam putusan KPPU tentang kartel penetapan harga. Risalah Hukum, 18(1), 1-19.
