Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.23
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Varia Justicia Jurnal Yudisial
Mukti Fajar Nur Dewata
Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta
Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
PROBLEMATIKA PENGUKURAN PANGSA PASAR Mukti Fajar Nur Dewata
Jurnal Yudisial Vol 10, No 3 (2017): ALIENI JURIS
Publisher : Komisi Yudisial RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29123/jy.v10i3.287

Abstract

ABSTRAKPutusan Nomor 09/KPPU-L/2009 menilai telah terdapat bukti yang sah dan meyakinkan bahwa PT CI telah melanggar Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat. Adapun pasal yang dilanggar adalah Pasal 17 ayat (1) yang memuat ketentuan mengenai larangan bagi pelaku usaha untuk melakukan penguasaan pasar, dan Pasal 25 ayat (1) yang memuat ketentuan terkait dengan posisi dominan. Putusan KPPU tersebut kemudian dibatalkan oleh Mahkamah Agung melalui Putusan Nomor 502 K/PDT.SUS/2010 yang menyatakan bahwa PT CI tidak terbukti melanggar pasal-pasal tersebut. Penelitian ini mengkaji mengenai perdebatan penafsiran klausul tentang penguasaan atas produksi dan pemasaran sehingga mengakibatkan monopoli dan persaingan usaha tidak sehat, dan perbedaan pengukuran pangsa pasar yang dijadikan dasar oleh KPPU dan Mahkamah Agung sehingga menghasilkan putusan yang berbeda. Penelitian ini dilakukan secara yuridis normatif yang mengkaji berbagai bahan hukum, serta dianalisis secara deskriptif komparatif. Temuan penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa ada perbedaan cara penafsiran teks Undang-Undang Anti Monopoli antara KPPU dan Mahkamah Agung. KPPU menggunakan standar pangsa pasar di kota tertentu di mana PT CI membuka usaha, Mahkamah Agung menggunakan standar pangsa pasar dengan wilayah nasional.Kata kunci: persaingan usaha, monopoli, pengukuran pangsa pasar, posisi dominan.ABSTRACTDecision of Commission for the Supervision of Business Competition (KPPU) Number 09/KPPU-L/2009 stated that there were valid and convincing evidences that PT CI has violated Law Number 5 of 1999 regarding Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition Article 17 paragraph (1) regarding the prohibition for business actors to control the markets, and Article 25 paragraph (1) containing provisions relating to dominant position. The decision was subsequently annulled by the Supreme Court by the Decision Number 502 K/PDT.SUS/2010 stating that PT CI was not proven to have violated those articles. This research examines as follows: first, debate on interpretation of clauses about the control of production and markets resulting in monopoly and unfair business competition, second, differences in measurement of market share applied by the KPPU and the Supreme Court as underpinning two different decisions. This analysis was conducted using the method of normative juridical approach by examining various law materials, and analyzing through descriptive comparative method. The result of this analysis showed that there is a difference in ways of interpreting the text of Anti-monopoly Law between the KPPU and the Supreme Court. The KPPU used market share standards in certain cities where PT CI opened a business while Supreme Court used market share standards in national territory.Keywords: business competition, monopoly, market share measurement, dominant position.
Technology Company Merger and Acquisition: a Study of Indonesian and European Union Competition Law Reni Budi Setianingrum; Mukti Fajar Nur Dewata; Rahul Kumar
Varia Justicia Vol 19 No 1 (2023): Vol 19 No.1 (2023)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Muhammadiyah Magelang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31603/variajusticia.v19i1.8769

Abstract

Technology has become an essential part of human activities, people's needs and demands for it are significantly increased. People have become dependent on technology because they use it to travel, communicate, learn, do business and simplify human life. Currently, technology-based companies are growing rapidly all over the world, as we can see how Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, Apple, and various other companies dominate the market. Likewise in Indonesia, people's activities cannot be separated from various products from technology-based companies, such as Gojek, Tokopedia, Shopee, Grab, Traveloka, etc. Recently, Gojek and Tokopedia officially merged to become the GoTo Group and are claimed to be the largest technology group in Indonesia. This merger is usually carried out by business actors to seek more profit and to become a company that wins the market both on a national and international scale and in fact has a significant impact on changes in structure and control over the market so that there is a potential for abuse of dominant position to occur by limiting the choice of both products, quality, and price. Based on this case, this normative research using the case approach and statute approach aims to analyze how Indonesian competition law regulates technology company mergers, by comparing it with European Union competition law. The conclusion of this research is, lesson learn from European Union, Indonesian Competition Law needs to adapt the Data Protection Law in reviewing tehcnology company mergers in Indonesia.
Co-Authors Budi Setianingrum, Reni Rahul Kumar