Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

LEGAL POSITION OF PAYLATER AS A PAYMENT METHOD IN INDONESIA David Banjarnahor; Alifah Nur Fitriana Naridha Naridha; Tengku Andrias Prayudha; Sy. Muhamamad Ikhsan; Auliya Rochman
Authentica: Private Law Journal Vol 8 No 2 (2025): Vol 8 No 2 (2025)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Jenderal Soedirman

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20884/aplj.v8i2.17343

Abstract

This study examines the perspective of the juridical status of the implementation of the payment system and its legality dimension in social practice using the statute approach and conceptual approach methodology. To examine the problem of this research method, it uses normative juridical by using a conceptual approach to review and study the research topics raised. The findings indicate that the increasing adoption of payout immediately raises new complexities in users' understanding of rights and obligations in digital contracts. Regulatory uncertainty makes consumers vulnerable to debt traps due to the consequences of late payments, and the risk of personal data leakage increases as the use of pay later services is not equipped with adequate data protection. It is time for Bank Indonesia and the Financial Services Authority to be clearer in identifying concrete steps to improve financial literacy and consumer supervision in line with the development of increasingly developing and innovative pay laters. Based on a comprehensive analysis, it can be concluded that the legal position of the payout mechanism is equivalent to traditional credit agreements in general.
The regulator’s dilemma in proving algorithmic cartels against the principle of fair competition in the digital economy era Tengku Andrias Prayudha; David Banjarnahor; Auliya Rochman; Sy. Muhammad Ikhsan; Alifah Nur Fitriana Naridha
Priviet Social Sciences Journal Vol. 5 No. 12 (2025): December 2025
Publisher : Privietlab

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55942/pssj.v5i12.1064

Abstract

The rapid development of the digital economy, marked by the adoption of pricing algorithms, has introduced new dynamics to Indonesia's competition law landscape. Algorithmic systems enable autonomous price setting based on market data learning without direct human intervention. This condition potentially gives rise to algorithmic cartels, a form of market coordination occurring without explicit agreement, yet producing anti-competitive effects similar to conventional cartels. The national legal framework, specifically Law No. 5 of 1999 and KPPU Regulation No. 4 of 2010, remains inadequate to address this phenomenon, as it is still anchored to a traditional paradigm requiring the element of “agreement” as a prerequisite for proving violation. This study aims to analyze the dilemma faced by the regulator (KPPU) in proving the existence of algorithmic cartels against the principle of fair competition in the digital era. Employing a normative juridical approach, this study examines relevant legislation, academic literature, and international policies from the OECD and European Commission. The findings indicate a regulatory gap in Indonesia's competition law regarding proof involving autonomous systems. Furthermore, the KPPU faces conceptual and technical obstacles in determining legal intent (legal intent) and the validity of digital evidence derived from algorithmic systems. The study concludes that proving algorithmic cartels must shift from an intent-based approach to an effects-based approach, which focuses on assessing the economic impact on market structure and consumer welfare. Therefore, strategic recommendations include reinterpreting the element of “agreement” in Article 1, paragraph 7, and Article 11 of Law No. 5 of 1999 to encompass algorithmic coordination that generates anti-competitive effects. Additionally, the KPPU is mandated to develop digital evidence guidelines and strengthen the multidisciplinary institutional capacity to effectively oversee algorithmic behavior. These steps are crucial for Indonesian competition law to adapt to the realities of the digital economy while ensuring justice and legal certainty.