Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Antimonopoly Law and Business Competition - Group 4
Antimonopoly Law and Business Competition - Group 4
BY GROUP 4
ASTRID FARADILA Z KHURIN ADIBATUL L
2307010177 2307010247
DINDA PUTRI N
2307010055
PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES 04
CONSPIRACY 05
2. MONOPSONY
3. MARKET MASTERY
4. PREDATORY PRICING
5. CHEATING IN SETTING
PRODUCTUON COSTS
6. CONSPIRACY
/COLLUCION
In a conspiracy, there is cooperation involving two/ or more business actors who jointly
commit unlawful acts.
Juridically, the definition of business conspiracy is regulated in Article 1 point 8 of Law
Number 5 Year 1999 (Antimonopoly Law).
"As a form of cooperation carried out by business actors with other business actors
with the intention of controlling the relevant market for the benefit of the conspiring
business actors."
1. Tender rigging
2. Conspiracy to divulge trade
secrets
3. Conspiracy to restrain trade
To oversee the implementation of the Antimonopoly
Law, a commission was established. This establishment
is based on Article 34 of the Antimonopoly Law which
instructs that the establishment of the organizational
structure, duties, and functions of the commission is
stipulated through a presidential decree. The
commission was then established by Presidential
Decree No. 75/1999 and named the Business
Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU).
Assessing agreements that may result in monopolistic practices and/or unfair
business competition.
To assess business activities and/or actions of business actors that may result
in monopolistic practices and/or unfair business competition.
To assess the presence or absence of abuse of dominant position that may
result in monopolistic practices and/or unfair business competition.
Take actions in accordance with the commission's authority as stipulated in
Article 36 of the Antimonopoly Law.
Provide advice and consideration on government policies relating to
monopolistic practices and/or unfair business competition.
Prepare guidelines and/or publications related to Law Number 5 Year 1997.
Provide periodic reports on the results of the commission's work to the
president and the DPR.
The conclusion is that the KPPU is authorized to conduct research and investigation
and finally decide whether certain business actors have violated the Antimonopoly
Law or not. Business actors who object to the KPPU's decision are given the
opportunity for 14 (fourteen) days after receiving notification of the decision to file
an objection to the district court.
KPPU must prioritize the public interest over individual interests in handling alleged
violations of the antitrust law. This is in accordance with the objectives of the
Antimonopoly Law stated in Article 3 letter a of the Antimonopoly Law, namely to
“Safeguard the public interest and improve national economic efficiency as one of
the efforts to improve people's welfare”.