Efektivitas Peraturan KPPU No. 1 Tahun 2010 tentang Tata Cara Penanganan Perkara dalam Penegakan Undang-Undang No. 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat

Abstract

The focus of the research is to examine the effectiveness of the Regulation of the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) Number 1 of 2010 concerning Procedures for Handling Cases in enforcing Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition. The formulation of the problem in this thesis is: (1) How is the implementation of the handling of business competition cases by the KPPU based on Commission Regulation Number 1 of 2010? (2) What factors influence the effectiveness of case handling based on Commission Regulation Number 1 of 2010? This study employed a juridical-empirical research method with a statute approach, a conceptual approach, and a case approach. Data were obtained through literature review, analysis of KPPU decisions, and interviews with relevant parties. They were then analyzed qualitatively to obtain a comprehensive picture of regulatory implementation. The research results show that the implementation of case handling by the KPPU has basically followed the procedural mechanisms as stipulated in Commission Regulation Number 1 of 2010, starting from the investigation stage, preliminary examination, further examination, until the decision is made. However, there are a number of obstacles that affect effectiveness, including the lack of coordination between law enforcement agencies, weak enforcement powers of decision execution, limited institutional resources, resistance from business actors, and the still low level of public and market players' understanding of competition law. The conclusion of this study states that although Commission Regulation No. 1 of 2010 has provided formal certainty regarding case handling procedures, its effective implementation is still suboptimal due to the influence of structural, institutional, and cultural factors. Therefore, policy reformulation and institutiona