CD Skripsi

Penggunaan Bukti Petunjuk Dalam Proses Pembuktian Perkara Persaingan Usaha Dan Monopoli Dalam Pengadilan Indonesia

---

hbfdhghfg In handling cartel cases in Indonesia, the proof process often uses only one piece of evidence, namely evidence. In practice, there are many discrepancies in the use of this evidence, many cartel cases are decided in the sense that they are accepted and some are rejected, even going to the Supreme Court. If you look at the Regulations of the Business Competition Supervisory Commission in Article 1 Paragraph (13) of the 2019 PERKOM that regarding the use of evidence there are at least 2 (two) valid pieces of evidence, and the legal pieces of evidence can be seen in Article 42 of Law no. 5 of 1999. In business competition, indirect evidence is accepted as valid evidence as long as the evidence is sufficient and logical, and there is no other stronger evidence that can weaken the indirect evidence. Judging from the law enforcement of Law Number 5 of 1999 through the use of indirect evidence, it is still characterized by legal uncertainty, and there should be no differences in judges' opinions in handing down decisions in both the Courts and the Supreme Court using indirect evidence.
This type of research can be classified as Normative research which examines the legal synchronization of the existence of KPPU regulations faced with Law Number. 5 of 1999 and the Commission Law and Regulations of 2019 in the legal verification system for business competition procedures, specifically handling cartel problems. This research uses secondary data which is divided into primary legal materials, secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials.
Based on the research results, it can be concluded that the Business Competition Supervisory Commission as a business competition supervisory institution in Indonesia must of course have strong firmness so that business competition violations do not occur again, especially in the certainty and position of indirect evidence used in the examination process by the Supervisory Commission. Business Competition, which reaches the District Court and Supreme Court, the Business Competition Supervisory Commission should have specific regulations related to the validity of evidence of guidance. and of course the panel of judges must be observant in reviewing cases and giving decisions and also the panel of judges must understand the independent position of the Business Competition Supervisory Commission and the Commission's weak regulations which should be used as a basis for consideration by the panel of judges in deciding business competition cases, so that there will be no more injustice to Business Competition Supervisory Commission and reported business actors
Keywords: Court, Indirect Evidet, Proof

---

Ketersediaan

Informasi Detail

Judul Seri

-

No. Panggil

2009111544

Penerbit

Pekanbaru : Universitas Riau - F. Hukum - Hukum Perdata., 2024

Deskripsi Fisik

-

Bahasa

Indonesia

ISBN/ISSN

-

Klasifikasi

2009111544

Tipe Isi

-

Tipe Media

-

Tipe Pembawa

-

Edisi

-

Subjek

HUKUM

Info Detail Spesifik

-

Pernyataan Tanggungjawab

Rahmat Hidayat Syahputra

Versi lain/terkait

Lampiran Berkas

Komentar

---

Anda harus masuk sebelum memberikan komentar