The Characteristics of Business Competition Procedural Law in Indonesia: An Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/aclj.v7i1.43994Keywords:
Procedural Law, KPPU, Monopoly, Evidence, Business CompetitionAbstract
Business competition is an important element in the modern market economic system in Indonesia, functioning to achieve efficiency and innovation, as well as increase social welfare. However, the competition dynamics do not always operate in an ideal manner. Various market distortions, such as monopolies, cartels, tender control, and the abuse of dominant positions, still often happen, hindering the creation of an efficient market. The problem formulations of this paper are: (1) What are the basic characteristics of the business competition legal procedures? (2) How are they implemented? This research strives to answer basic questions on the characteristics and implementation of business competition legal procedures as applied by the Business Competition Supervisory Commission. This research utilized the normative-juridical research method with a focus on the study of positive legal norms, especially those which are applied by the Business Competition Supervisory Commission. The procedural law carried out by this commission has its own unique characteristics, which are sui generis, meaning that they do not fully follow the patterns of criminal and civil legal procedures. The Business Competition Supervisory Commission combines the legal and economic approaches to assess an action as a violation of business competition principles. Thus, the evidencing process not only focuses on the formal law aspect but also considers market dynamics, industrial structure, and economic impacts towards business actors and consumers. The application of the procedural law by the Business Competition Supervisory Commission shows a systematic process, starting from the investigation, initial examination, and up to the further examination processes. This process is rather effective in disclosing violation patterns, such as cartels, tender control, and the abuse of dominant positions. The Business Competition Supervisory Commission’s decisions in various cases shows this commission’s capability to comprehensively assess anti-competition behavior through profound economic analysis.
Downloads
References
Absori, A., Nugroho, S. S., Ellyani, E., Nurani, S. S., & Fadlillah, M. (2020). Indonesia as an ecocracic country: The state’s responsibility and the people’s participation in preserving and in managing the environment quality. Quality-Access to Success., 21(179), 140–143.
Absori & Subakti, N. (2021). Pedoman Penyusunan Skripsi. Surakarta: Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta.
Absori, Nurhayati, N., Bangsawan, M. I., Budiono, A., Achmadi, & Nugroho, H. S. W. (2020). Green and Health Constitution of Green Open Space and Its Implementation in Surakarta. Journal of Global Pharma Technology, 12(9), 70–74. Retrieved from http://repo.poltekkesdepkes-sby.ac.id/2422/
Adelia, I., Wahyuni, S., & Tarigan, T. M. (2024). Keunikan Hukum Waris Adat Minangkabau. El-Mujtama: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat, 4(1), 73–79.
Adriaman, M. (2024). Pengantar Metode Penelitian Ilmu Hukum. Agam: Yayasan Tri Edukasi Ilmiah.
Akbar, M., & Atalim, S. (2021). Kepastian Hukum Penerapan Indirect Evidence Dalam Penanganan Kasus Kartel Di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Adigama, 4(1), 1003–1022.
Alwan, S., Arsad, J. H., Alauddin, R., Faisal, Laha, F., & Umarsangaji, A. (2022). Legal Considerations from Judges in Supreme Court Decree No. 85 K/Pid.Sus/2013 Concerning the Acquittal of Exhibitionism Perpetrators and Their Implications as a Jurisprudence. Jurnal Jurisprudence, 12(2), 299–312. https://doi.org/10.23917/jurisprudence.v12i2.1401
Aminah, S. (2023). Kedudukan bukti tidak langsung (Indirect Evidence) dalam penyelesaian praktik kartel di Indonesia. Dharmasisya Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI, 2(3), 34.
Anggusti, M., Sinaga, D. M., & Simamora, J. (2021). Penggunaan Indirect Evidence (Alat Bukti Tindak Langsung) oleh KPPU dalam Proses Pembuktian Dugaan Praktik Kartel (Studi di Kantor Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Wilayah I Medan). Nommensen Journal of Legal Opinion, 2(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.51622/njlo.v2i01.207
Arief, D., Gultom, E., & Yuanitasari, D. (2025). Dekonstruksi Penegakan Hukum Putusan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (KPPU) dalam Menghadapi Problematika Yuridis dan Tantangan Kepastian Hukum di Bidang Persaingan Usaha. Jurnal Locus Penelitian Dan Pengabdian, 4(10), 9801–9812.
Aswim, D. (2021). Analisis Komparatif Sistem Pembuktian Kartel Indonesia dan Malaysia di Era Mea dalam Perspektif Hukum Persaingan Usaha. Lex Librum, 8(1), 63–76.
Aulia, R. (2025). Analisis Struktur Pasar dan Implikasinya terhadap Persaingan Usaha. Circle Archive, 1(7).
Blegur, M. M. C. N. (2018). Pengaruh Penggunaan Indirect Evidence Dalam Putusan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (Studi Putusan Nomor 04/Kppu-I/2016). Kertha Patrika, 40(3), 186. https://doi.org/10.24843/KP.2018.v40.i03.p05
Competition Compliance in Malaysia. (2019). Retrieved April 11, 2026, from Zaid Ibrahim & Co. website: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=2c15586c-ec34-4ecd-80c5-fb1663fb5d52
Darmawan, S. A. (2022). Kekuatan Indirect Evidence Dalam Pembuktian Kasus Persekongkolan Tender dan Penerapannya di Dalam Proses Tender. Jurnal Pengadaan Barang Dan Jasa, 1(1), 10–18.
Erlangga, W. D. (2021). Analisis Kekuatan Alat Bukti Tidak Langsung dalam Pembuktian Dugaan Praktik Kartel. Jurnal Supremasi, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.35457/supremasi.v11i2.1335
Faisal, F., & Ogli, T. M. A. P. (2025). Judicial Reasoning on Criminal Sanctions in Court Decision: Comparation between Indonesia and Uzbekistan. Jurnal Jurisprudence, 15(2), 177–194. https://doi.org/10.23917/jurisprudence.v15i2.13649
Fauzan, A. (2023). Relevansi Kedudukan Dan Kewenangan Hukum Tim Pengawas Mekanisme Perubahan Perilaku Terlapor Pada Pemeriksaan Perkara Di Kppu Dengan Asas Nemo Judex In Causa Sua (UII). UII. Retrieved from https://dspace.uii.ac.id/handle/123456789/44880
Hardiana, D. (2022). Dimensi Yuridis Dan Ekonomis Dalam Penanganan Persekongkolan Tender Pemerintah: Studi Komparatif Atas Putusan KPPU No. 17/KPPU-L/2022. Jurnal Magister Ilmu Hukum: Hukum Dan Kesejahteraan, 9(2), 13–23.
Lubis, Z. M., Panjaitan, B. S., & Harahap, A. (2025). Aspek Hukum Pidana dalam Persaingan Usaha Pasca UU Cipta Kerja No. 6 Tahun 2023 dan Regulasi KPPU. Jurnal Ilmiah Penegakan Hukum, 12(1), 91–100.
Mustamin, M. (2024). Analisis Hukum Anti Monopoli Dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat Di Indonesia Berdasarkan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan. Jurnal Asy-Syarikah: Jurnal Lembaga Keuangan, Ekonomi Dan Bisnis Islam, 6(1), 57–72.
Muttaqin, M., & Ratnawati, E. (2023). Peran Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Untuk Mencegah Praktik Monopoli di Indonesia. Al-Manhaj: Jurnal Hukum Dan Pranata Sosial Islam, 5(2), 1137–1146.
Paendong, J. E. (2022). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Pelaku Usaha Kecil Dalam Persaingan Usaha Di Indonesia Menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli Dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat. Lex Privatum, 5(4).
Posner, R. A. (2014). Economic analysis of law (9th ed.). New York: Wolters Kluwer.
Prasetya, H. I., & Muhammad, D. W. (2021). Pembuktian Dalam Penyelesaian Perkara Persekongkolan Tender. Media of Law and Sharia, 3(1), 21–39.
Pratama, M. I. (2025). Pendekatan Pembuktian Dalam Penegakan Hukum Persaingan Usaha Berdasarkan Undang-Undang No. 5 Tahun 1999. Jurnal Magister Ilmu Hukum: Hukum Dan Kesejahteraan, 9(2), 24–36.
Puspaningrum, G., Widayanti, I. D., & Handono, M. (2023). Pengembanan Hukum Praktis Dan Teoritis Penegakan Persaingan Usaha Di Indonesia. Diversi: Jurnal Hukum, 9(1), 173–201. https://doi.org/10.32503/diversi.v9i1.3825
Rangkuti, A. H. (2022). Analisis Yuridis Persekongkolan Tender Rehabilitasi Jalan dalam Perspektif Hukum Persaingan Usaha (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 14/Kppu. 1/2018). Universitas Medan Area.
Rizkia, N. D., & Fardiansyah, H. (2023). Metode Penelitian Hukum (Normatif dan Empiris). Bandung: Penerbit Widina.
Sahir, S. H. (2021). Metodologi penelitian. Yogyakarta: Penerbit KBM Indonesia.
Sanger, B. D. N. (2021). Tinjauan Yuridis Problematika Penegakan Hukum Persaingan Usaha dalam Menciptakan Kepastian Hukum. Lex Administratum, 9(3).
Santosa, P. A. (2020). Upaya Hukum Keberatan Terhadap Putusan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Melalui Pemeriksaan Tambahan Berdasar Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 3 Tahun 2005 (UII). UII. Retrieved from https://dspace.uii.ac.id/handle/123456789/11372
The Government of Malaysia. Competition Act 2010 (Act 712). , (2010). Malaysia.
Wibowo, S., Dimyati, K., Absori, A., Wardiono, K., Tomás, M. R., Budiono, A., & Lyandova, V. (2023). Islamic Nomocracy: from the Perspectives of Indonesia, Spain and Russia. Legality: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum, 30(1), 91–111. https://doi.org/10.22219/ljih.v31i1.25358
Widiyanti, I. D., Ramadhanti, N. A., & Puspaningrum, G. (2022). Makna Alat Bukti Tidak Langsung dalam Pembuktian Perkara Kartel. Jurnal Jeblr, 2(1).
Wintansari, Y. H. (2020). Analisis pertimbangan hukum kasus kartel minyak goreng di Indonesia. Lex Renaissance, 5(4), 895–911.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Wicaksono, Arief, Saslina, Nadia, Faisal Faisal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
