Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
3.078
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Bestari Yustisia SALAM: Jurnal Sosial dan Budaya Syar-i Arena Hukum Dusturiah : Jurnal Hukum Islam, Perundang-undangan dan Pranata Sosial Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum LEGALITY Journal of Community Service and Empowerment Community Empowerment Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology Audito Comparative Law Journal (ACLJ) Jurnal Dedikasi Hukum Jurnal Hukum Pelita Satya Dharma: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Lex Scientia Law Review AJCD
Rahayu Hartini
Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang, Malang, Indonesia
Religion Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Arts Humanities Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Public Health Social Sciences Other

Published : 22 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 22 Documents
Search

 1   2   3 
Pemberantasan Dan Pencegahan Oligopoli dan Persekongkolan Oleh KPPU (Studi Kasus PT.Telekomumikasi Indonesia) Hartini, Rahayu; Azzahra, Fatimah
JURNAL HUKUM PELITA Vol. 5 No. 1 (2024): Jurnal Hukum Pelita Mei 2024
Publisher : Direktorat Penelitian dan Pengabdian (DPPM) Universitas Pelita Bangsa

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37366/jh.v5i1.3970

Abstract

The Indonesian Telecommunications Industry Development The Republic of Indonesian government launched the program has a noble goal of ensuring that telecommunications infrastructure reaches all parts of Indonesia. To achieve this goal, several telecommunications companies joined the Parapa Ring consortium and organized the Parapa Ring project which aims to expand telecommunications networks throughout Indonesia. In handling bid manipulation cases, the Komisi Pengawasan Persaingan Usaha Perusahaan (KPPU) applies two main principles, namely the principle of per se illegality and the principle of reasonableness. However, the application of these principles is often challenged and flawed, as evidenced by Decision No. 36/KPPU-L/2010 on alleged discriminatory practices and collusion in the tender for the procurement of the Palapa Ring Mataram-Kupang cable system project. The doctrine of unlawfulness states that a particular agreement or business activity is unlawful if there is no further evidence of its effects. On the other hand, the rule of reason requires further evidence to determine whether an action inhibits or promotes competition. In a tender conspiracy, KPPU applies the rule of reason because it needs to be proven in more depth the effect of the act on business competition. Decision Number 36/KPPU-L/2010 highlights the misapplication of the principle of reason.
The International Arbitration Award as a Simple Proof Requirement in Bankruptcy Hartini, Rahayu; Ali, Hasani Moh.; Multazam, Mochammad Tanzil; Faizin, Moh.; Putra, Ahmad Dzulfiqar Hibatullah
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 8 No. 1 (2024): Contemporary Legal Challenges and Solutions in a Global Context
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v8i1.14056

Abstract

Bankruptcy and Arbitration are forms of mechanisms for resolving disputes among parties. The purpose of this research is to explore the use of international arbitration awards as a simple proof requirement in bankruptcy cases. The research methods employed include the statute approach and conceptual approach. The findings of this research indicate that international arbitration awards can be admissible as simple proof due to the final and binding nature of international arbitration awards when they meet certain requirements established by Indonesian positive law. Specifically, if an international arbitration award has been registered and requested for enforcement at the Central Jakarta District Court, the international arbitration award is considered valid. Meeting these criteria, international arbitration awards, as authentic evidence, fulfill the simple proof requirement. However, if an international arbitration award does not meet these requirements, it cannot be considered authentic evidence in bankruptcy proceedings under Indonesian positive law, as the authenticity of international arbitration awards is only recognized when they have been registered and requested for enforcement.
Co-Authors Ageng Supadi, Rani Tri Ahmad Dzulfiqar Hibatullah Putra Ali, Hasani Moh. Amir Syarifuddin Arief, Muhammad Briliawan Gama Rahmatullah Fadilla Muhammad Mahdi Faizin, Moh. Fatimah Azzahra Jamik Imam Utomo Kurniawan, Wahyudi Moch Tanzil Multazam Moh.Ali, Hasani Mohammad Faisal Jamaludin Malik Mohammad Hanif Furqan Aufa Putra Muhammad Luthfi Mulyawati, Delia Patma, Tundung Subali Permana, Adi Pramesti, Yashinta Chindy Putra, Ahmad Dzulfiqar Hibatullah Rahma, Tannasya Putri Saputra, Septiadi Satrio Noto Negoro, Muhammad Setiya Nugroho Tinuk Dwi Cahyani Wahyu Prihanta Windi Argiatmoko Yunita, Aryani Zahra, Ashila Zainuri, Ach. Muhib