Article Sidebar

Submitted
September 1, 2021
Accepted
November 30, 2021
Published
December 21, 2021
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 170 Download : 183

Main Article Content

Abstract

The enactment of Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation has had an impact on existing laws. One of the affected laws is Law No. 5 of 1999 on the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition. The formulation of the problems that will be discussed in this paper is a). How is the existing condition of the authority of the Commercial Court to appeal the KPPU’s decision after the Job Creation Law? b). what is the prospect of bringing cases before the Commercial Court on monopoly and business competition cases after the Job Creation Law? This research uses normative research with a statutory approach, conceptual approach, and a philosophical approach.  Based on the discussion, it can be concluded that, firstly, the existing authority of the Commercial Court’s continues to expand. Currently it is believed to settle the objection cases to the KPPU’s decision through the Job Creation Law. The Commercial Court can examine the formal pleadings and material facts that form the basis of the KPPU’s decision, so that the Commercial Court is not limited in time to complete it. Second, the prospect of the Commercial Court’s authority in cases of unfair business competition is determined by two factors, namely internal factors in the form of the existing condition of the current authority specifically in the field of economic law issues, and the condition of human resources who have been selected and trained and experienced in resolving economic law cases. External factors including (a) the development of the business economy which is increasingly complex and requires an effective, efficient and neutral settlement agency, and the KPPU theoretically has not been able to guarantee a fair process in the settlement of the business competition case because it includes the authority to investigate, investigate, prosecute and adjudicate.

Keywords: Authority; Commercial Court; Prospect; Business Competition Laws

Kewenangan Pengadilan Niaga dalam Kasus Persaingan Usaha Pasca Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 tentang Cipta Kerja

Abstrak

Pemberlakuan Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 tentang Cipta Kerja berdampak pada peraturan perundang-undangan yang ada. Salah satu undang-undang yang terdampak adalah UU No. 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat. Rumusan masalah yang dibahas dalam makalah ini adalah a). bagaimana kewenangan Pengadilan Niaga saat ini untuk mengajukan banding atas putusan KPPU pasca berlakunya UU Cipta Kerja? b). bagaimana prospek permohonan kasus monopoli dan persaingan usaha ke Pengadilan Niaga setelah berlakunya UU Cipta Kerja? Penelitian normatif ini menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan filosofis. Berdasarkan pembahasan, penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa, pertama, kewenangan yang ada dari Pengadilan Niaga saat ini terus berkembang. Saat ini, adalah diyakini bahwa penyelesaian kasus keberatan atas putusan KPPU dapat dilakukan berdasarkan UU Cipta Kerja. Pengadilan Niaga dapat memeriksa dalil-dalil formil dan fakta materiil yang menjadi dasar putusan KPPU sehingga Pengadilan Niaga tidak dibatasi waktu untuk menyelesaikannya. Kedua, prospek kewenangan Pengadilan Niaga dalam perkara persaingan usaha tidak sehat ditentukan oleh dua faktor, yaitu faktor internal berupa kondisi yang ada dari kewenangan saat ini khususnya di bidang hukum ekonomi dan kondisi sumber daya manusia yang telah dipilih dan dilatih serta berpengalaman dalam menyelesaikan kasus-kasus hukum ekonomi. Di samping itu, terdapat faktor-faktor eksternal antara lain (a) perkembangan ekonomi bisnis yang semakin kompleks dan membutuhkan lembaga penyelesaian yang efektif, efisien, dan netral, serta KPPU secara teoretis belum dapat menjamin proses yang adil dalam penyelesaian kasus persaingan usaha karena meliputi kewenangan untuk menyelidiki, menyidik, menunutut, dan mengadili.

Kata Kunci: Kewenangan; Pengadilan Niaga; Prospek; Hukum Persaingan Usaha

Keywords

Authority Commercial Court Prospect Business Competition Laws

Article Details

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

How to Cite
Musataklima, M. (2021). Authority Of The Commercial Court In Business Competition Cases Post Law No. 11 Of 2020 On Job Creation. Prophetic Law Review, 3(2), 149–172. https://doi.org/10.20885/PLR.vol3.iss2.art3
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Indonesian Legislations
  2. Constitution on Indonesia.
  3. Law No. 5 of 1999 on Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition.
  4. Law No. 31 of 2000 on Industrial Design.
  5. Law No. 32 of 2000 on Integrated Circuit Layout Design.
  6. Law No. 14 of 2002 on the Tax Court.
  7. Law No. 5 of 2004 on the Supreme Court.
  8. Law No. 24 of 2004 on Deposit Insurance Corporation.
  9. Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations.
  10. Law No. 48 of 2009 on Judicial Power.
  11. Law No. 28 of 2014 on Copyright.
  12. Law No. 13 of 2016 on Patents.
  13. Law No. 20 of 2016 on Brand.
  14. Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation.
  15. Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perppu) No. 1 of 1999 on Amendments to the Bankruptcy Law.
  16. Government Regulation No. 44 of 2021 on the Implementation of the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition.
  17. Supreme Court Regulation No. 3 of 2019 on Procedures for Filing an Objection to the Decision of the Business Competition Supervisory Commission.
  18. Supreme Court Regulation No. 4 of 2019 on Amendments to Regulation of the Supreme Court No. 2 of 2015 on Procedures for Settlement of Simple Lawsuits.
  19. Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2006 on Procedures for Filing an Objection to the Decision of the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency (BPSK).
  20. Supreme Court Circular No. 1 of 2021 on the Transfer of Examination of the Decisions of the Commission for Business Competition Supervisory to the Commercial Court.
  21. Books
  22. Abdul-Baqi and Fu’ad M, Mu’jam al-mufahras li alfaz al-Qur'an al-Karim (Dar al-Fikr, 1981).
  23. Asshiddiqie J, Pengadilan Khusus, dalam Hitam Putih Pengadilan Khusus (Sekretariat Jenderal Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia, 2013).
  24. _______, Perkembangan dan Konsolidasi Lembaga Negara Pasca Reformasi (Konpres, 2008).
  25. Auda J, Maqâsid al-Shariah as Philosophy of Islamic Law a Systems Approach (International Institute of Islamic Thought, 2007).
  26. Dworkin R, Taking Rights Seriously (Gerald-Duckworth, 1977).
  27. Fahmi Lubis A and Natasya Sirait N, Hukum Persaingan Usaha. Antara Teks & Konteks (Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha, 2009).
  28. Grabenwarter C, ‘Fundamental Judicial and Procedural Rights’ in Dirk Ehlers (ed), European Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (De Gruyter 2011).
  29. Manan B, Sistem Peradilan Berwibawa (Suatu Pencarian) (FH UII Press 2004).
  30. Muchsin, Independent Judiciary After Amendment to the 1945 Constitution According to Law No. 48 of 2009 (Untag Press 2010).
  31. Nadapdap B, Hukum Acara Persaingan Usaha Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (Pranada Media Group, 2020).
  32. Nawawi Arief B, Kapita Selekta Hukum Pidana tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Terpadu (Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro, 2006).
  33. Sabiq S, Fikih Sunnah 14 (Mudzakir A.S., Almaarif 1988).
  34. Samuddin R, Fiqih Demokrasi: Menguak Kekeliruan Haramnya Umat Terlibat Pemilu dan Politik (GOZIAN Press, 2013).
  35. Susanti Nugroho A, Proses Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen Ditinjau dari Hukum Acara Serta Kendala Implementasinya (Prenada Media, 2008).
  36. Tahir H, Proses Hukum yang Adil dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia (LaksBang Presindo, 2010).
  37. Zoelva H, ‘Konstitusionalitas Pengadilan Khusus’ in Hermansyah, Imran, Elza Faiz, Dinal Fedrian (eds.), Putih Hitam Pengadilan Khusus (Sekretariat Jenderal Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia, 2013).
  38. Journal
  39. Abdurrahman al-Suyuthi A, Al-Asybah wa al-Nadhair (Dar Al-Fikr, 1996).
  40. Ali M, ‘Pengawasan Peredaran Barang Cetakan, Due Process of Law dan Hak Atas Kebebasan Mengeluarkan Pendapat’ (2011) 8(4) Jurnal Konstitusi 521.
  41. Floranta Adonara F, ‘Prinsip Kebebasan Hakim dalam Memutus Perkara Sebagai Amanat Konstitusi’ (2015) 12(2) Jurnal Konstitusi 217.
  42. L. Kagramanto B, ‘Implementasi UU No. 5 Tahun 1999 Oleh KPPU’ [2007] Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Yustisia 1.
  43. Manan B and Dwi Harijanti S, ‘Konstitusi dan Hak Asasi Manusia’ (2016) 3(3) Padjadjaran Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 448.
  44. Nashrullah Kartika Mayangsari R G and Hasni Noor H, ‘Konsep Maqashid Al-Syariah dalam Menentukan Hukum Islam: Perspektif Al-Syatibi dan Jasser Auda’ (2014) 1(1) Jurnal Al-Iqtishadiyah 50.
  45. Nur Hayati A, ‘Analisis Tantangan dan Penegakan Hukum Persaingan Usaha Pada Sektor E-Commerce di Indonesia’ (2021) 21(1) Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure 109.
  46. Nurhaini Butarbutar E, ‘Principle of Unguilty Presumption: Its Application and Regulation in Civil Procedure Law’ (2011) 11(3) Jurnal Dinamika Hukum 470.
  47. Parulian Simanjuntak E, ‘Examination to Determine the Presence or Absence of Abuse of Authority according to Government Administration Law’ (20180) 7(2) Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan 237.
  48. Petronella Simbolon A, ‘Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Dalam Penegakan Hukum Persaingan Usaha’ (2008) 20(3) Jurnal Mimbar Hukum 459.
  49. Sembiring R, ‘Indonesia’s Omnibus Bill on Job Creation: A Setback for Environmental Law?’, (2020) 4 Chinese Journal of Environmental Law 97.
  50. Sourdin T and Burstyner N, ‘Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied” (2014) 4(1) Victoria University Law and Justice Journal 46.
  51. Susanti B, ‘Menyoal Jenis dan Hierarki Peraturan Perundang-undangan di Indonesia’ (2017) 1(2) Jentera Journal 128.
  52. Syamsuddin M, ‘The Failure of the Court to Protect Consumers: A Review of Consumer Dispute Resolution in Indonesia’ (2021) 44 Journal of Consumer Policy 117.
  53. Thontowi J, ‘Kedudukan dan Fungsi Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia’ (2011) 18(2) Jurnal Hukum 285.
  54. Website
  55. ‘FGD Kewenangan Pengadilan Niaga dalam Mengadili Permohonan Keberatan terhadap Putusan KPPU’ (2021) <https://kppu.go.id/blog/2021/08/fgd-kewenangan-pengadilan-niaga-dalam-mengadili-permohonan-keberatan-terhadap-putusan-kppu/> accessed 12 September 2021.
  56. Miscellaneous
  57. Adi Sulistyono, ‘Pembangunan Hukum Ekonomi untuk Mendukung Pencapaian Visi Indonesia 2030’ (Speech on the Inauguration of Professor of Economic Law at the Faculty of Law, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta, 2007).
  58. Sri Wiyanti Eddyono (ed.), ‘Catatan Kritis Terhadap Undang-Undang No. 11 Tahun 2020 tentang Cipta Kerja (Pengesahan DPR 5 Oktober 2020)’ (2020) edition 2.
  59. Ministry of Law and Human Rights, ‘Naskah Akademis RUU tentang Cipta Kerja’ (2020).