CD Skripsi

Pengaruh Penggunaan Bukti Tidak Langsung (Circumtantial Evidence) Dalam Menangani Perkara Kartel Dikaitkan Dengan Legalitas Bukti Tidak Langsung

---

ABSTRACT
The limitative evidentiary system in Law Number 5 of 1999 Concerning Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition creates rigidity in the implementation of circumstantial evidence in the handling of cartel cases in Indonesia. This rigidity can be seen in article 42 which does not accept an indirect evidentiary system as valid and independent evidence. Even though cartel cases in any country rarely have direct evidence as in criminal law, and therefore the use of circumtatial evidence is something that cannot be separated from cartels. Therefore, this study aims to analyze how the influence of the use of circumtatial evidence in handling cartel cases is also related to its position as valid evidence or not, so far indirect evidence plays a very important role in exposing cartel cases in Indonesia, but unfortunately when cases already entered the District Court and the Supreme Court various views on circumstantial evidence many of which led to rejection.
This type of research can be classified into normative research which examines the legal synchronization of the existence of KPPU Regulations before Law Number 5 of 1999 and Law Number 9 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code in the system of proof of business competition procedural law, especially the handling of cartel cases. This study uses secondary data which is divided into primary legal materials, secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials.
Based on the results of the research, it can be concluded that the first is the use of circumtatial evidence by the KPPU in dealing with cartel cases which have been rejected by many, such as the cases of the Cooking Oil Cartel, Amplodiphine Besytale Drug, and the Fuel Surcharge Cartel on the grounds that circumtatial evidence is not evidence contained in Article 42 and different from the guiding evidence contained in article 188 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code which means the Assembly disregards the position of the KPPU, on the other hand there are also cartel cases that use circumtatial evidence such as the Cartel for Four-wheeled Vehicles, Cartel Motor Matic and most recently the Cartel case Airline Tickets therefore circumtatial evidence has legal uncertainties in its application and there is a glimmer of hope that indirect evidence can be accepted as valid and independent evidence. Second, indirect evidence also has an effect on preventive action and therefore circumtatial evidence must be able to strengthen its position as independent evidence considering that in the current regulations there are many deficiencies such as the KPPU's limited authority, limited evidence, and not yet adhering to leniency system as a form of best practice in handling cartel cases. The author's suggestion is that the first is that KPPU Regulations must be used as material for the panel's consideration in deciding business competition cases. The two business competition procedural laws must be updated which strengthen the position of circumtatial evidence as valid and independent evidence.
Keywords: Circumtatial Evidence, Cartel, Evidence

---

Ketersediaan

Informasi Detail

Judul Seri

-

No. Panggil

1909111658

Penerbit

Pekanbaru : Universitas Riau – Fakultas Hukum – Hukum PERDATA bisnis., 2023

Deskripsi Fisik

-

Bahasa

Indonesia

ISBN/ISSN

-

Klasifikasi

1909111658

Tipe Isi

-

Tipe Media

-

Tipe Pembawa

-

Edisi

-

Subjek

HUKUM PERDATA BISNIS

Info Detail Spesifik

-

Pernyataan Tanggungjawab

DAUS

Versi lain/terkait

Lampiran Berkas

Komentar

---

Anda harus masuk sebelum memberikan komentar