Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.817
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Arena Hukum Humani (Hukum dan Masyarakat Madani) Jurnal Hukum Bisnis Bonum Commune Mulawarman Law Review
Hartono, Julienna
Unknown Affiliation
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 4 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 4 Documents
Search

 1 
ANALISIS PENGGUNAAN ALGORITMA HARGA SEBAGAI BENTUK PERJANJIAN PENETAPAN HARGA DI INDONESIA Hartono, Julienna; Rosyadi, Julianda; Nugraha, Xavier
Jurnal Hukum Bisnis Bonum Commune Volume 4, Nomor 1 Februari 2021
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30996/hukum bisnis bon.v4i1.4499

Abstract

AbstractPricing algorithm is a form of digitalization in the business sector. Pricing algorithm offers efficiency in making decisions regarding the pricing of good/services. Unfortunately, pricing algorithm can also be misused. One form of the misuse is to apply the pricing algorithm as a tool to adjust prices according to the prices used by business competitors. At this point, potential violations of Article 5 of Law Number 5 Year 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition emerge. This article regulates the prohibition of price fixing agreements. Pricing agreements are prohibited because they require consumers to purchase goods above competitive prices. Based on this background, issues to be discussed in this study are 1) the use of the pricing algorithm as a form of price fixing agreement and 2) proof of the use of the pricing algorithm as a form of price fixing agreement. This study uses a doctrinal method with a statutory and conceptual approach. From the analysis it can be concluded that 1) the use of  pricing algorithm in which there is an order to adjust prices to competitor prices basically has the potential to become a form of price fixing agreement because it can fulfill the elements of Article 5 of Law 5/1999. 2) In proving the use of algorithms as a price fixing agreement, it is actually quite difficult because it has to meet the minimum bewijs. Most likely the existence of the algorithm itself is only evidence of clue which is classified as indirect evidence. Its existence must be supported by plus factors in the form of rationality analysis of pricing, market structure analysis, analysis of performance data, and/ or analysis of the use of collusion facilities.Keywords: pricing algorithm; price fixing agreements; competition lawAbstrakAlgoritma harga merupakan sebuah bentuk masuknya digitalisasi di bidang bisnis. Algoritma harga menawarkan efisiensi dalam pengambilan keputusan terkait penentuan harga barang/jasa. Algoritma harga juga bisa disalahgunakan. Salah satu bentuk penyalahgunaannya adalah dengan menjadikan algoritma harga sebagai alat untuk menyesuaikan harga mengikuti harga yang digunakan oleh pelaku usaha pesaingnya. Pada titik inilah potensi pelanggaran Pasal 5 Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat muncul. Pasal ini mengatur tentang larangan perjanjian penetapan harga. Perjanjian penetapan harga dilarang karena membuat konsumen harus membeli barang/jasa di atas harga kompetitif. Berdasarkan latar belakang tersebut, rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah 1) penggunaan algoritma harga sebagai bentuk perjanjian penetapan harga dan 2) pembuktian terhadap penggunaan algoritma harga sebagai bentuk perjanjian penetapan harga. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode doktrinal dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan konseptual. Dari analisis yang ada dapat disimpulkan bahwa 1) penggunaan algoritma harga yang di dalamnya terdapat perintah melakukan penyesuaian harga dengan harga pesaing pada dasarnya berpotensi menjadi sebuah bentuk perjanjian penetapan harga karena dapat memenuhi unsur Pasal 5 UU 5/1999. 2) Dalam membuktikan adanya penggunaan algoritma sebagai perjanjian penetapan harga, sejatinya cukup sulit karena harus memenuhi bewijs minimum. Keberadaan algoritma sendiri kemungkinan besar hanya merupakan bukti petunjuk yang merupakan bukti tidak langsung. Keberadaannya harus didukung dengan plus factor berupa analisis rasionalitas penetapan harga, analisis struktur pasar, analisis data kinerja, dan/atau analisis penggunaan fasilitas kolusi.
Keabasahan Surat Kuasa Khusus Dari Luar Negeri Tanpa Nazegelen: Sebuah Desuetude Hartono, Julienna; Nugraha, Xavier; Budisusanto, Eko
Hukum dan Masyarakat Madani Vol. 11 No. 2 (2021): November
Publisher : Universitas Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.26623/humani.v11i2.3988

Abstract

The special power of attorney is a crucial thing in a lawsuit, but it is not considered. For example, many are not aware of the nazegelen requirement stipulated in SEMA7/2012 for special power of attorney made overseas. Therefore, this legal research will analyze nazegelen as a condition for the validity of a special power of attorney made overseas, as well as the legal consequences if these conditions are not met. Sources of law will be analyzed using a statute approach and a conceptual approach. In conclusion, the requirements for the validity of a special power of attorney made overseas are: 1) state clearly and specifically the use of the special power of attorney, 2) clearly and specifically mention the role of certain level of court to be used, 3) clearly states the relevant relative competence, 4) mentions the identity and position of the parties in detail, 4) Must be legalized by representatives of the Republic of Indonesia, and 5) nazegelen. Of these conditions, the conditions that many do not know are related to the obligation to carry out nazegelen. As a result, although these requirements have been regulated in SEMA 7/2012, the norms are not applied. This condition is called desuetude. Non-fulfillment of the nazegelen requirements should be cause the lawsuit to be unacceptable, a procedural exception can be filed, and the examination process that occurs is invalid.
Public Participation in Constitutional Amendments with Deliberation Requirements in the Unamendability Framework: A Comparative Study Nugraha, Xavier; Felicia, Stefania Arshanty; Hartono, Julienna
Jurnal Mulawarman Law Review Vol 7 No 2: Mulawarman Law Review - December 2022
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Mulawarman University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30872/mulrev.v7i2.904

Abstract

From time to time, it is considered that Constitutional Amendments are lack of public participation and contains political aspects. Therefore, many nations regulate certain provisions to ensure that the Constitutional Amendments are merely for public order and welfare. One of the provision is the temporal unamendability. In the shape of deliberation requirements, which is essentially the involvement of the public in submitting constitutional amendments within a certain time limit. Indonesian Law doesn’t recognize the concept of deliberation requirements, therefore, the authors will analyze Sweden and South Korean Law, two countries that are also using civil law system and have regulated deliberation requirements in submitting constitutional amendments. This paper will discuss two problems: 1) the legal provisions for constitutional amendments in Indonesia, Sweden, and South Korea, and 2) the guarantee model for public participation in constitutional amendments using the deliberation requirements model. This paper uses legal research method, with a conceptual, statutory, and comparative approach. The results show that Sweden and South Korean Law have involved both the public and the Representative Body to determine wether constitutional amendment will be performed, meanwhile Indonesia hasn’t involve the public to vote for a constitutional amendments. Therefore, to guarantee public participation in constitutional amendments, the authors provide a model which include the public participation through vote or referendum to decide a constitutional amendments and a period of time to file for constitutional amendment.
Problematika Keputusan Tata Usaha Negara Yang Bersifat Fiktif Positif Setelah Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 Abrianto, Bagus Oktafian; Nugraha, Xavier; Hartono, Julienna; Kosuma, Indah Permatasari
Arena Hukum Vol. 16 No. 3 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Brawijaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21776/ub.arenahukum.2023.01603.5

Abstract

This doctrinal research aims to analyze the development of legal consequences and legal protection related to the Government's omission on applications to state administrative officials. Until the enactment of the Job Creation Act, there were 3 (three) different legal norms regarding the legal consequences of the Government's omission on applications to state administrative officials, namely fictitious rejection, in the State Administrative Court Law, fictitious approval followed up with applications, in the Government Administration Act, and fictitious approval without being followed up with an application, in the Job Creation Act. Based on the principle that the new law overrides the old law, the applicable legal consequences are as regulated in the Job Creation Act. Then, legal protection related to the Government's omission on applications to state administrative officials are the imposition of administrative sanctions, submitting applications for the determination of fictitious approval of state administrative decisions to the Administrative Court, filing claims based on government actions disputes, or submitting reports to the Ombudsman.
Co-Authors Bagus Oktafian Abrianto Budisusanto, Eko Felicia, Stefania Arshanty Kosuma, Indah Permatasari Nugraha, Xavier Rosyadi, Julianda