Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"ABSTRAK Analisis ini bermula dari laporan pemasok(distributor) kepada Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha terhadap dugaan pelanggaran persaingan usaha yang dilakukan oleh PT. Carrefour Indonesia. Laporan tersebut disebabkan bahwa PT. Carrefour menerapkan National contract sebagai syarat pemasokan barang ke gerai Carrefour, yang mana perjanjian(contract) tersebut memuat klausul (trading term) yang diantaranya mengatur tentang listing fee, minus margin, regular discount. Klausul listing fee, minus margin, dan regular discount tersebut diduga oleh Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha telah melanggar Undang-undang nomor 5 tahun 1999 tentang larangan praktek monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha tidak sehat pasal 19 huruf a dan huruf b, pasal 25 ayat (1) huruf a. Sebagai pokok permasalahan yang dihadapi dalam penulisan ini yaitu bagaimana proses pembuktian dalam pemeriksaan perkara persaingan usaha oleh KPPU dan bagaimanakah kekuatan pembuktian alat bukti surat berupa duplikasi surat oleh Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha. Pokok permasalah tersebut di jawab dengan menggunakan metode analisis yuridis normatif dengan menyimpulkan bahwa proses pemeriksaan perkara pada Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha merupakan pendekatan administratif dan perdata sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang undang nomor 5 tahun 1999 dan Peraturan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha nomor 1 tahun 2006. Namun dalam proses pembuktian perkara persaingan usaha mendekati persamaan dalam proses pembuktian dalam hukum acara pidana. Dan komisi dalam melakukan pemeriksaan alat bukti surat adalah menggunakan dokumen bukan otentik dikarenakan telapor tidak menyerahkan alat bukti surat otentik kepada komisi yang kemudian alat bukti surat tidak otentik tersebut menjadi pertimbangan majelis dalam memberikan putusannya, dimana cara tersebut sesungguhnya tidak sesuai dengan tata cara pemeriksaan perkara persaingan usaha dalam hal jika terlapor tidak kooperatif untuk memberikan alat bukti surat yang dibutuhkan oleh komisi sebagaimana diatur dalam pasal 41 Undang-undang nomor 5 tahun 1999.

---

ABSTRACTThis analysis began with the report on the supplier to the Commision for the supervision of business competition towards the assumption of the violation of the competition for efforts that was done by PT. Carrefour Indonesia. This report was caused that PT. Carrefour applied National contract as the condition for the supplying of the thing to the Carrefour counter, whichever the agreement (contract) contained the clause (trading term) that among them arranged about listing fee, minus margin, regular discount. The clause listing fee, minus margin, and regular discount it was suspected by the Commision for the supervision of business competition to violate regulation number 5 /1999 about the ban on the practice of the monopoly and the Competition for efforts were unhealthy the article 19 point a and point b, the article 25 (1) point a. As the subject of the problems that was dealt with in this writing that is how the process of authentication in the case inspection of the competition for efforts by Commision for the supervision of business competition and how the strength of authentication of the document evidence took the form of duplication of the document by the Commision for the supervision of business competition. The problems above answered by using the normative juridical analysis method with concluded that the process of the case inspection of the Commision for the supervision of business competition to be the administrative approach and civil law as being arranged in regulation number 5/1999 and regulation of the Commision for the supervision of business competition number 1/2006. However in the process of authentication of the case of the competition for efforts approached the equality in the process of authentication in the law of criminal procedure. And the commission in carrying out the inspection of the document evidence was to use the document not authentic was caused PT. Carrefour did not hand over the authentic letter/docoment evidence to the commission that afterwards the letter/document evidence was not authentic that became consideration of the council in giving his decision, Where this method actually was not in accordance with the conduct of the case inspection of the competition for efforts in the matter if PT. Carrefour uncooperative to give the letter/document evidence that was needed by the commission as being arranged in the article 41 regulation number 5/1999."

"Penelitian ini mengangkat permasalahan yang disampaikan oleh LKPPUI terkait dugaan pelanggaran terhadap prinsip due process of law yang dilakukan oleh Majelis Komisi dalam Perkara Nomor 07/KPPU-L/2007. Menurut LKPPUI, Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha ("Komisi") telah melanggar aturan mengenai jangka waktu pemeriksaan pendahuluan, pemeriksaan lanjutan, dan putusan Komisi. Selain itu, para Terlapor dalam perkara tersebut juga mendalilkan bahwa Komisi telah melanggar prinsip due process of law dalam memeriksa dan mengadili perkara tersebut.Permasalahan yang dikaji dalam penelitian ini adalah: 1. Apakah pengaturan tentang prosedur beracara di Komisi telah mendasarkan pada prinsip due process of law? 2. Bagaimana penerapan prinsip due process of law dalam Putusan Komisi Nomor 07/KPPU-L/2007 tentang dugaan Pelanggaran oleh Kelompok Usaha Temasek? Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengkaji prinsip due process of law dalam prosedur beracara di Komisi, dan mengkaji prinsip due process of law dalam Putusan Komisi Nomor 07/KPPU-L/2007 tentang dugaan Pelanggaran oleh Kelompok Usaha Temasek.Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif yaitu penelitian hukum yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan pustaka atau data sekunder. Data yang digunakan dalam tesis ini adalah bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder, dan bahan hukum tersier. Pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan suatu kegiatan studi dokumen terhadap data sekunder.Teori yang digunakan dalam Tesis ini adalah teori hukum progresif sebagaimana yang digagas oleh Satjipto Rahardjo.Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pengaturan mengenai prosedur beracara di Komisi baik dalam Peraturan Komisi Nomor 1 Tahun 2010 maupun peraturan Komisi sebelumnya yakni Peraturan Komisi Nomor 1 Tahun 2006, telah mendasarkan pada prinsip due process of law. Disamping itu, prinsip due process of law diterapkan juga oleh Majelis Komisi yang memeriksa dan mengadili Perkara Nomor 07/KPPU-L/2007. Adapun saran dalam penelitian ini adalah dilakukan perubahan terhadap Peraturan Komisi Nomor 1 Tahun 2010 mengenai batas waktu pemeriksaan, dimana perlu dibedakan antara pemeriksaan yang melibatkan pelaku usaha asing dengan pemeriksaan yang hanya melibatkan pelaku usaha dalam negeri.

---

This research lifted up the issue conveyed by LKPPUI related to alleged violations for due process of law principle conducted by an assembly commission in case number 07/KPPU-L/2007. According to LKPPUI, Business Competition Supervisory Commission ("Commission") had violated the rules on the length of time preliminary examination, further examination, and the decision of Commission. Besides, the reported on the case also postulated that Commission had violated the due process of law principle in examine and prosecute the case.That is assessed the issue is: 1. Whether the arrangement about The Competition Law Procedure has been to base on due process of law principle? 2. How the application of due process of law principle in The Decision of Commission number 07/KPPU-L/2007 about Temasek is a cross ownership of the share. The purpose of the research is to assess due process of law principle in The Competition Law Procedure and to assess due process of law principle in The Decision of Commission number 07/KPPU-L/2007.The research using normative research method, it is law research conducted with researching library materials or secondary materials. The materials using in the Thesis is primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials. The collection of materials conducted with the study of documents for secondary materials.The theory used in the Thesis is Progressive Legal Theories as is held by Satjipto Rahardjo.The research result indicate that The Competition Law Procedure either in the regulation of Commission number 1 of 2010 nor regulation of Commission number 1 of 2006, it has been base on due process of law principle. Besides that, assembly Commission in case number 07/KPPU-L/2007 also to application of due process of law principle. As for advice in the research is necessary to amendments for regulation of Commission number 1 of 2010 about the time limit to investigation, where necessary distinguished between examination for foreign businessman with examination for domestic businessman."