Image of Persengkongkolan Pelaksanaan Tender Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli Dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat (Studi Putusan Nomor 23/Kppu-L/2018)
Penanda Bagikan

CD Skripsi

Persengkongkolan Pelaksanaan Tender Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli Dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat (Studi Putusan Nomor 23/Kppu-L/2018)

One of the substances of Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition is the provisions governing conspiracy in tenders. These provisions are regulated in Article 22 which is a special provision with the aim of creating a conducive business climate to support and develop activities in providing quality goods and services at competitive prices. Considering that the impact resulting from acts of conspiracy in tenders is very significant for national economic development and a healthy competitive climate, regulations regarding the prohibition of tender conspiracy can be implemented either using a Rule of Reason approach or a per se illegal approach, resulting in administrative sanctions and criminal sanctions. and additional penalties that will be imposed on business actors can proceed as desired by Law Number 5 of 1999. This research was conducted to find out the consideration of the commission panel in the decision of the Business Competition Supervisory Commission Number 23/KPPU-L/2018 and to find out whether the decision Business Competition Supervisory Commission Decision Number 23/KPPU-L/2018 is in accordance with the provisions of Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning Prohibition of Monopoly Practices and Unfair Business Competition.
This type of research is classified as normative legal research. In normative legal research, the data source is secondary data consisting of primary legal materials, secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials. Collecting normative legal research data uses data collection techniques using library research. Data obtained through literature study will be analyzed qualitatively. In drawing conclusions the author uses a deductive thinking method, namely a way of thinking that draws conclusions from a general statement or proposition to a specific statement.
Based on the research results, it can be understood that in KPPU Decision No. 23/KPPU-L/2018, the Commission Council applies a Rule of Reason approach to prove the impact of unfair business competition and prove the existence of horizontal and vertical collusion between business actors and other parties. Sanctions imposed by the Commission Council in KPPU Decision No. According to the author, 23/KPPU-L/2018 is not accurate. Sanctions for tender committees involved in tender rigging are not regulated by the KPPU as the enforcer of business competition law. Therefore, the KPPU does not have the authority to impose sanctions on tender committees because imposing sanctions on tender committees who collude with tender participants is within the scope of the authority of criminal case investigators.

Keywords: Tender Rigging - Unfair Business Competition

Ketersediaan
#
Perpustakaan Universitas Riau 1709122806
1709122806
Tersedia
Informasi Detail
Judul Seri
-
No. Panggil
1709122806
Penerbit
Pekanbaru : Universitas Riau - F. Hukum - Hukum Perdata.,
Deskripsi Fisik
-
Bahasa
Indonesia
ISBN/ISSN
-
Klasifikasi
1709122806
Tipe Isi
-
Tipe Media
-
Tipe Pembawa
-
Edisi
-
Subjek
HUKUM PERDATA BISNIS
Info Detail Spesifik
-
Pernyataan Tanggungjawab
Versi lain/terkait

Tidak tersedia versi lain

Lampiran Berkas
Komentar
Anda harus masuk sebelum memberikan komentar