Article Sidebar

Submitted
August 23, 2023
Accepted
January 28, 2024
Published
February 28, 2024
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 111 Download : 244

Main Article Content

Abstract

Issues related to the procedure of competition law proceeding in KPPU RI is a very important study. Moreover, this research specializes in reviewing the legal standing of the monitoring team in the commitment decision mechanism (which is one of the stage of many stages) in the case proceeding at KPPU RI. This study aims to answer the question whether the norm regulates the legal standing and legal authorities of commitment decision’s monitoring team in Business Competition Supervisory Commission Regulation No. 1/ 2019 concerning Procedures for Handling Cases of Monopoly Practices and Unfair Business Competition is in accordance with the nemo judex in causa sua principle. This research is normative doctrinal legal research with statutory and conceptual approach. This study concludes that the norm regulates the legal standing and legal authorities of commitment decision’s monitoring team in Business Competition Supervisory Commission Regulation No. 1/ 2019 concerning Procedures for Handling Cases of Monopoly Practices and Unfair Business Competition is in accordance with the nemo judex in causa sua principle.
Keywords: KPPU; Nemo Judex; Commitment Decision; Monitoring Team.


Abstrak
Permasalahan terkait prosedur penanganan perkara persaingan usaha di KPPU RI merupakan kajian yang penting, terlebih dalam penelitian ini penulis mengkhususkan kajiannya dalam meneliti terkait kedudukan tim pengawasan pada masa pengawasan mekanisme perubahan perilaku yang menjadi salah satu proses dari sekian tahapan dalam prosedur penanganan perkara di KPPU RI. Rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah apakah norma tentang kedudukan dan kewenangan hukum tim pengawas perubahan perilaku dalam Peraturan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha No. 1 Tahun 2019 tentang Tata Cara Penanganan Perkara Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat berkesesuaian dengan asas nemo judex in causa sua? Adapun jenis penelitian ini adalah penelitian normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach) dan konseptual (conceptual approach). Bahan hukum yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini berupa semua sumber hukum yang berkekuatan hukum tetap, dan bahan hukum sekunder berupa jurnal, buku, dan karya ilmiah terkait. Adapun hasil dari penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa norma tentang kedudukan dan kewenangan hukum tim pengawas perubahan perilaku sebagaimana dalam Peraturan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha No. 1 Tahun 2019 tentang Tata Cara Penanganan Perkara Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat tidak berkesesuaian dengan asas nemo judex in causa sua.
Kata Kunci: KPPU; Nemo Judex; Perubahan Perilaku; Tim Pengawas.

Keywords

KPPU Nemo Judex Commitment Decision Monitoring Team

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Lex Renaissance

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International 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
Ahmad Fauzan, & Siti Anisah. (2024). Kedudukan Hukum Tim Pengawas Mekanisme Perubahan Perilaku Di KPPU RI: Perspektif Asas Nemo Judex In Causa Sua. Lex Renaissance, 8(2), 307–325. https://doi.org/10.20885/JLR.vol8.iss2.art7
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Broom, Herbert. A Selection of Legal Maxims, Classified and Illustrated. 7 ed. Philadelphia: T. & J. W. Johnson & Co, 1874.

  2. Coke, Sir Edward. The Selected Writings and Speeches of Sir Edward Coke. Diedit oleh Steve Sheppard. Indianapolis, 2003.

  3. Fauzan, Ahmad. “Relevansi Kedudukan dan Kewenangan Hukum Tim Pengawas Mekanisme Perubahan Perilaku Terlapor pada Pemeriksaan Perkara di KPPU dengan Asas Nemo Judex In Causa Sua.” Universitas Islam Indonesia, 2023. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=LLpSnxcAAAAJ&citation_for_view=LLpSnxcAAAAJ:eQOLeE2rZwMC.

  4. Garner, Bryan A. Black’s Law Dictionary. 9 ed. St. Paul: West Publishing Co, 2009.

  5. Hobbes, Thomas. The Leviathan. Diedit oleh Oakesott M. London: MacMillan Publishers, 1946.

  6. Kenneth Ononeze Dominic Okwor. “Nemo Judex in Causa Sua: A Case for The Reevaluation of The Composition and Disciplinary Powers of The National Judicial Council.” University of Jos, Nigeria, 2014.

  7. Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government. Diedit oleh Peter Laslett. Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

  8. Mertokusumo, Sudikno. Mengenal Hukum Suatu Pengantar. Yogyakarta: Liberty, 2002.

  9. Arif, Achmad, dan Affrizal Berryl Dewantara. “Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 005/PUU-IV/2006 (Berdasarkan Asas Nemo Judex Idoneus In Propria Causa dan Prinsip Istiqlal Qadha).” Jurnal Ijtihad 5, no. 1 (2019): 169–91. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.21111/ijtihad.v13i2.3540.

  10. Rahma Safura, Nirwana. “Sanksi Administrasi Bagi Pelaku Usaha yang Melakukan Kesempatan Perubahan Perilaku Dalam Hukum Acara Persaingan Usaha.” Jurist-Diction 5, no. 4 (2022): 1535–64. https://doi.org/10.20473/jd.v5i4.37343.

  11. Schwarzenberger, G. “The Nemo Judex in Sua Causa Maxim in International Judicial Practice.” Anglo-American Law Review 1, no. 4 (1972): 482–98. https://doi.org/doi:10.1177/147377957200100402.

  12. Valsan, Remus. “Fiduciary Duties, Conflict of Interest, and Proper Exercise of Judgment.” McGill Law Journal 62, no. 1 (23 Januari 2016): 1–40. https://doi.org/10.7202/1038707ar.

  13. Williams, Ian. “Dr Bonham’s Case and ‘Void’ Statutes.” The Journal of Legal History 27, no. 2 (2006): 111–28. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org /10.1080/01440360600831154.

  14. CNN Indonesia. “MA Tolak Kasasi, Garuda Indonesia Wajib Bayar Denda Rp1 Miliar.” CNN Indonesia. Diakses 23 Maret 2022. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/ekonomi/20220321104947-92-774092/ma-tolak-kasasi-garuda-indonesia-wajib-bayar-denda-rp1-miliar.

  15. Heriani, Fitri Novia. “MA Kuatkan Putusan KPPU atas Perkara Umrah Garuda Indonesia.” Hukum Online. Diakses 23 Maret 2022. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/ma-kuatkan-putusan-kppu-atas-perkara-umrah-garuda-indonesia-lt623821d3154a8/?page=all.

  16. KPPU RI. “Daftar Putusan KPPU.” KPPU RI. Diakses 1 Oktober 2022. https://putusan.kppu.go.id/simper/view_putusan_kppu/.

  17. ———. “Mahkamah Agung Kuatkan Putusan KPPU Atas Perkara Umrah yang Melibatkan Garuda Indonesia.” KPPU RI. Diakses 23 Maret 2022. https://kppu.go.id/blog/2022/03/mahkamah-agung-kuatkan-putusan-kppu-atas-perkara-umrah-yang-melibatkan-garuda-indonesia/.

  18. ———. Putusan perkara PT. Garuda Indonesia (Persero), Tbk, No. 06/KPPU-L/2020 (2021).

  19. Mahkamah Agung RI. Putusan tingkat Kasasi perkara PT. Garuda Indonesia (Persero), Tbk v. Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Republik Indonesia (KPPU), No. 561 K/PDT.SUS-KPPU/2022 (2022).

  20. Pengadilan Niaga pada Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat. Putusan tingkat Keberatan perkara PT. Garuda Indonesia (Persero), Tbk v. Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Republik Indonesia (KPPU), No. 3/PDT.SUS-KPPU/2021/PN Jkt.Pst (2021).

  21. Raharjo, Budi. “Peran Multifungsi KPPU Mendapatkan Sorotan.” Republika. Diakses 7 Juli 2021. https://www.republika.co.id/berita/qvocxh415/peran-multifungsi-kppu-mendapatkan-sorotan.

  22. Uly, Yohana Artha. “Garuda Indonesia Ajukan Ubah Perilaku terkait Dugaan Diskriminasi Penjualan Tiket Umrah.” Kompas. Diakses 23 September 2020. https://money.kompas.com/read/2020/09/21/184050026/garuda-indonesia-ajukan-ubah-perilaku-terkait-dugaan-diskriminasi-penjualan?page=all.

  23. Yuantisya, Mutia. “Kasasi Ditolak, Garuda Indonesia Wajib Bayar Denda Rp 1 Miliar.” Tempo. Diakses 23 Maret 2022. https://bisnis.tempo.co/read/ 1573144/kasasi-ditolak-garuda-indonesia-wajib-bayar-denda-rp-1-miliar?page_ num=1.