Circumstantial Evidence and Unfair Business Competition Practice: Is A Law Reform Necessary?
Abstrak
The use of circumstantial evidence in unfair business competition case investigations are regulated institutionally by the Commission for the Supervision of Business Competition. However, due to the absence of regulation as a basis of its use in the Commercial Court and the Supreme Court, this practice remains questionable. This article aims to analyze the issue regarding the use of circumstantial evidence in the Commercial Court and the Supreme Court in order to evaluate the urgency of a law reform to the existing competition law in Indonesia. Based on the research, it was found that there are several issues on the practice, including (1) the absence of a law regarding the use of circumstantial evidence may result in a legal certainty; (2) different views regarding the practice result in inconsistencies in law enforcement; (3) this practice contradicts the principle of the due process model which is adopted in Indonesia. A law that is constructed systematically is necessary to ensure the legal certainty of those who are trying to seek for justice, particularly related to the enforcement of competition law.
Referensi
Antoni, V. (2014). The Position of Indirect Evidence as Verification Tools in the Cartel Case. Mimbar Hukum, Vol.26(1).
Fadhilah, M. (2019). Penegakan Hukum Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat Oleh Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (KPPU) Dalam Kerangka Ekstrateritorial. Wawasan Yuridika, Vol.3(1).
Garner, B. A., & Black, H. C. (2004). Black’s Law Dictionary. St. Paul, MN : Thomson/West.
Huda, M. (2020). Hak Atas Memperoleh Kepastian Hukum dalam Perspektif Persaingan Usaha Melalui Telaah Bukti Tidak Langsung. Jurnal HAM, Vol.11(2).
Ishaq, H. (2014). Pengantar Hukum Indonesia (PHI). Jakarta : RajaGrafindo Persada.
Julyano, M., & Sulistyawan, A. Y. (2019). Pemahaman Terhadap Asas Kepastian Hukum Melalui Konstruksi Penalaran Positivisme Hukum. Jurnal Crepido, Vol.1(1).
Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha. (2019). Laporan Tahunan KPPU Tahun 2019. Jakarta: KPPU. P. 17, 101-105.
Mantili, R., Kusmayanti, H., & Afriana, A. (2016). Problematika Penegakan Hukum Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia Dalam Rangka Menciptakan Kepastian Hukum. Padjadjaran Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Vo.3(1).
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2018). Competition Primers for ASEAN Judges. P. 2.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (1996). Glossary of Industrial Organization Economics and Competition Law, English Version. Paris: OECD. P. 22.
Pasaribu, M. S. (2016). Challenges of Indonesian Competition Law and Some Suggestions for Improvement. Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).
Sahabuddin, S. (2014). Reorientasi Kebijakan Kriminal dalam Menyelesaikan Kasus Ringan (Dari Due Process Model Ke Reintegrative Model). Dinamika Hukum, Vol.14(1).
Siregar, Mahmul. (2018). Bukti Tidak Langsung (Indirect Evidence) dalam Penegakan Hukum Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Samudra Keadilan. (Vol. 13). P. 188.
Suryaningsi. (2018). Pengantar Ilmu Hukum. Samarinda: Mulawarman University Press.
Zaini, Z. D. (2012). Perspektif Hukum Sebagai Landasan Pembangunan Ekonomi di Indonesia (Sebuah Pendekatan Filsafat). Jurnal Hukum, Vol.28(2).
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA)
The author can hold the copyright without any restriction under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA)
Abstrak viewed = 207 times
PDF (English) downloaded = 216 times
