Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 23 Documents
Search

Barriers to Entry: Who Decides and Who Benefits? Anna Maria Tri Anggraini; Sabirin, Ahmad; Raafid Haidar Herfian
Media Iuris Vol. 9 No. 1 (2026): MEDIA IURIS
Publisher : Universitas Airlangga

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20473/mi.v9i1.76984

Abstract

Prohibiting the entry of competitors (barriers to entry) into the relevant market is an activity forbidden by Law No. 5 of 1999. Dominant business actors do not solely instigate barriers to entry; regulations can also pose challenges for new entrants to compete in the relevant market. This research aims to identify the factors that create entry barriers imposed by business actors, leading to unhealthy business competition. The research approach uses qualitative-empirical methods, focusing on KPPU decisions, such as Number 15/KPPU-L/2018 and Number 14/KPPU-L/2015. The research findings and analysis reveal that barriers to entry may result from incumbent business actors' actions and/or regulations that facilitate the entry of new players. An example of a barrier to entry, as highlighted in KPPU decisions, involves the issuance of internal office memos that impose restrictions on the sale of competitors' products and impose high tariffs that increase competitors' production costs. A novelty in this study lies in the disclosure of power dynamics in decision-making and profit distribution among stakeholders that affect market accessibility. Then, the authors recommended that the KPPU provide clear guidelines on the term barriers to entry and that business actors develop compliance guidelines to prevent violations of Law No. 5 of 1999.
The Form and Pattern of Business Actors Requirements in Exclusive Dealing: A Rule of Reason Approach Tri Anggraini, Anna Maria; Sabirin, Ahmad; Rumahorbo, Yoel Nixon A
Yustisia Vol 12, No 2: August 2023
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/yustisia.v12i2.73316

Abstract

Tying is usually defined as the dominant company selling one product since the buyer must also purchase a different product or agree not to purchase the bonded product from other suppliers. This paper analyzes requirements imposed by the reported business actor on other parties deemed to have violated the tying and bundling under competition law in Indonesia, the U.S., and the European Union. Also, it discusses the application of the Rule of Reason by the competition commission in these three region. This study uses a comparative law approach. The results of the analysis show that a tying agreement is an agreement that requires the recipient of the supply to buy other products that are not necessarily needed. Usually, these agreements are entered into by two affiliated companies or at least cooperating partners, one of which occupies a dominant position to prevent competitors from entering the relevant market. Not all tying agreements have a negative impact. Therefore, an impact analysis is needed through a rule of reason approach, especially in digital-based industries.
Integrating the Indonesian Competition Law and Renewable Energy Policy: Challenges and Strategies Towards Sustainability Anggraini, Anna Maria Tri; Sabirin, Ahmad; Wicaksana, Arif; Abrianti, Sharda; Arranchado, Jimi Rambo
Yustisia Vol 15, No 1: April 2026
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/yustisia.v15i1.101630

Abstract

The Indonesia's switch to renewable energy is crucial to combating climate change, meeting international decarbonisation goals, and ensuring energy security. However, institutional and regulatory barriers, especially under competition law, hinder renewable energy development. This paper examines whether Indonesia's competition law framework supports renewable energy development and proposes legal reform to balance market regulation and sustainability. The study analyses competition regulation and energy and regulatory development in the EU and China utilising normative legal research methods: statutory, conceptual, and comparison. The results show that Law Number 5 of 1999 still prioritises economic efficiency and market structure over sustainability. Renewable energy investment and innovation are hindered by market entry barriers, restricted infrastructural access, highly concentrated market structures, and state-owned energy businesses. A comparative analysis demonstrates that competition legislation can help energy transition when environmental and sustainability benefits are included. Therefore, this study recommends revising Article 51 of Law Number 5 of 1999, integrating sustainability criteria into competition analysis, providing fair access to energy infrastructure, and harmonising competition, energy, and environmental laws to create a more competitive, innovative, and sustainable renewable energy ecosystem in Indonesia.