ANALISIS PASAR BERSANGKUTAN DALAM PUTUSAN KPPU (STUDI PUTUSAN PERKARA NO. 13/KPPU-I/2019 DAN 10/KPPU/-1/2016)
(1) UII
(2) FH UII
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
The research entitled "Analysis of Relevant Market in KPPU Decisions (Study on Case Decisions No. 13 / KPPU-I / 2019 and 10 / KPPU / -1 / 2016)" raises two problem formulations, namely: first, how is the determination of the relevant market in Case Decisions. No. 10 / KPPU-I / 2016 and 13 / KPPU-I / 2019? Second, is the determination of the relevant market in Case No. 10 / KPPU-I / 2016 and 13 / KPPU-I / 2019? This research is a normative or doctrinal legal research, which describes, explains, and analyzes legal materials that refer to laws and regulations and KPPU's decisions relating to the determination of the relevant market. Analysis in legal materials in this study uses a qualitative descriptive approach, which is carried out by collecting legal materials, qualifying them, connecting theories related to research problems, drawing conclusions to determine the results and recommendations. The results of this study indicate, in Case No. 10 / KPPU-I / 2016, KPPU does not consider indicators (price, characteristics, and function) of the relevant market and geography. Meanwhile, in the case No. 13 / KPPU-I / 2019, KPPU makes considerations based on indicator indicators (price, characteristics, and functions). Thus, it appears that the two KPPU decisions are not in accordance with the provisions of KPPU Regulation No. 3 of 2009.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)References
Buku
Andi Fahmi Lubis, et.al., Hukum Persaingan Usaha Buku Teks, Edisi Kedua, KPPU, Jakarta, 2017.
Assahinur, “Pedoman Pasal 1 Angka 10 Mengenai Pasar Bersangkutan”, dalam Zaki Zein Badrun (editor), Media Berkala Komisi Persaingan Usaha: KOMPETISI, KPPU, Jakarta, 2009.
Hermansyah, Pokok-Pokok Hukum Persaingan Usaha Indonesia, Kencana, Jakarta, 2009.
Susanti Adi Nugroho, Hukum Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia Dalam Teori dan Praktik serta Penerapan Hukumnya, Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta, 2012.
Jurnal dan Penelitian Sebelumnya
Amalia Yustisia, “Pasar Bersangkutan (Relevant Market) dalam Putusan-Putusan KPPU tentang Kartel”, Tesis Magister Hukum, Fakultas Hukum Universitas Islam Indonesia, 2012.
Peraturan Perundang-undangan
Undang-Undang No. 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat.
Peraturan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Republik Indonesia No. 3 Tahun 2019 tentang Pedoman Penerapan Pasal 1 angka 10 tentang Pasar Bersangkutan berdasarkan Undang-Undang No. 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat.
Putusan Pengadilan
Putusan Perkara No. 10/KPPU-I/2016 tentang Dugaan Pelanggaran Pasal 15 ayat (2), Pasal 17, dan Pasal 25 ayat (1) Huruf a dan c Undang-Undang No. 5 Tahun 1999 terkait Jasa Telepon Tetap, Jasa Internet, dan Jasa IP TV di Indonesia oleh PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia.
Putusan Perkara No. 13/KPPU-I/2019 tentang Dugaan Pelanggaran Pasal 14, Pasal 15 ayat (2), dan Pasal 19 huruf d Undang-Undang No. 5 Tahun 1999 terkait Jasa Sewa Angkutan Sewa Khusus yang dilakukan oleh PT Solusi Transportasi Indonesia dan PT Teknologi Pengangkutan Indonesia.
Data Elektronik
Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha, “KPPU Tingkatkan Penanganan Kasus Telkom Indihome ke Tahap Pemeriksaan”, terdapat dalam https://www.kppu.go.id/id/blog/2016/10/kppu-tingkatkan-penanganan-kasus-telkom-indihome-ke-tahap-pemeriksaan/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter 11 Oktober 2016. Diakses tanggal 9 April 2021.
Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha, “KPPU Jatuhkan Sanksi GRAB & TPI”, terdapat pada https://kppu.go.id/blog/2020/07/kppu-jatuhkan-sanksi-ke-grab-dan-tpi/ Juli 2020. Diakses pada tan
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31602/al-adl.v14i1.4847
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2022 Princessa Deanera, Siti Anisah
Al-Adl: Jurnal Hukum is licensed under is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.