Government Actions in Efforts to Strengthen the Institutional Status of the KPPU

It is necessary to resolve juridically by affirming the KPPU as an independent state institution with financing through the State Revenue and Expenditure Budget and for the employee status of the KPPU secretariat, it needs to be formulated appropriately because the KPPU secretariat functions to support the implementation of the commission's duties in a single state institution. This affirmation can be done through changes to several provisions in Law Number 5 of 1999 so that the substance can keep up with the times and run effectively in the context of enforcing business competition law.

Amendment to Law Number 5 of 1999

Synchronization and harmonization between Law Number 5 of 1999 and existing regulations, as well as adding rules, is an urgency in strengthening the institutional status of the KPPU. The regulations referred to are HIR/RBg which are more general as well as other government policies in various sectors or across sectors.

In addition, it is necessary to review the duties and authorities assigned to the KPPU, considering that the KPPU is not a law enforcement institution and the sanctions given are only administrative. Moreover, the KPPU's authority and the limits of the authority it has are not clearly stated. Amendments to Law Number 5 of 1999 must include the separation of investigation, investigation, prosecution and adjudication authorities so that potential abuse of authority can be avoided.

Amendments to the anti-monopoly law also need to be made regarding business competition procedural law. To carry out business competition law enforcement, great authority is needed, namely the authority to search and confiscate, which has so far been carried out by the Police investigators. Several countries such as the United States, Germany and Japan, have accommodated the authority of investigators in their competition institutions to maximize their performance in enforcing business competition law. Therefore, the Indonesian government must be able to grant search authority and confiscation independently to the KPPU through changes to Article 35 and Article 36 because this authority will make it easier for the KPPU to uncover business competition cases.

The KPPU's authority to carry out investigations, investigations, prosecutions and adjudicate cases as contained in the current anti-monopoly law is an authority that is proportional to the objectives to be realized in the draft anti-monopoly law. The lawmakers can be guided by the authority possessed by investigators of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), namely the authority to search and confiscate themselves specifically in the field of competition and anti-monopoly. The investigators themselves can be taken from the police, especially in the directorate of economic crimes.

Another KPPU authority that needs to be strengthened is the authority to implement decisions or executions and coercive measures against business actors who do not want to comply with KPPU sanctions. One of the obstacles faced by the KPPU is the inability to execute decisions that have been decided by the KPPU itself. The existing laws and regulations are also less effective in making criminal acts against business actors who do not want to comply with KPPU decisions.

References

Mantili, Rai, Hazar Kusmayanti, and Anita Afriana. “Problematika Penegakan Hukum Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia dalam Rangka Menciptakan Kepastian Hukum.” Padjadjaran Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 3, no. 1 (2016).
Mochtar Arifin, Yasir. “Ideal Authority of Business Competition Law Enforcement Institutions in Indonesia.” Yogyakarta, 2019.
Sekarmaji, Aji. “A Review of Problems Arising in Business Competition Law Enforcement.” Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan Tahun ke-39 3 (2009).
W.Tobing, Donny. “Legal Review of Business Competition Procedural Law in the Perspective of Due Process of Law.” Journal of Private and Commercial Law 1, no. 1 (2017).
*This article represents the personal opinion of the author and does not represent the views of the editors of Literasi Hukum Indonesia.