KEDUDUKAN KOMISI PENGAWAS PERSAINGAN USAHA DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN INDONESIA

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze the position of the Business
Competition Supervisory Commission in the Indonesian regulatory system. To
analyze the overlap of authority between the Business Competition Supervisory
Commission and other existing State Institutions. The Business Competition
Supervisory Commission is an institution established based on Law No. 5 of 1999
concerning the Prohibition of Monopoly Practices and Unfair Business
Competition with the aim of overseeing the implementation. The Business
Competition Supervisory Commission is a state agency that has authority over the
enforcement of business competition laws. The Business Competition Supervisory
Commission has a function as a supervisor of business competition law
enforcement as well as having a function as an institution that decides whether or
not there is a violation of business competition. These two main functions make
this institution an institution that serves as an active supervisor in terms of direct
supervision, and as a passive supervisor in terms of adjudicating business
competition violations.
This type of research is qualitative by using normative juridical approach.
The type of data used is secondary data with library study data collection
techniques. Secondary data in the form of primary legal materials, secondary legal
materials. Furthermore, the data is analyzed qualitatively.
Based on the results of research and discussion, it can be concluded that first,
KPPU is an independent non-structural institution and is under the executive
authority. KPPU is one of the institutions that has the authority in overseeing the
implementation of the Antitrust Law. KPPU was formed as an institution that
specifically supervises businesses in carrying out their business activities so as not
to conduct monopoly practices or unfair business competition. Like most state
institutions, KPPU's position is merely a complement to the main state
institutions. This is based on the fact that the birth of KPPU does not necessarily
negate the role of major state institutions in overseeing the implementation of the
Antitrust Law. The second conclusion is that the Authority of KPPU is basically
clearly stated in Article 36 of the Antitrust Law, but in carrying out these
authorities there are limits that cannot be exceeded by KPPU.
Keywords: Authority of KPPU, Business Actors, State Institutions