Two Decades of Indonesian Business Competition Law: Implementation, Enforcement and Contribution to the Economy

Abstract

Two decades have been passed the Business Competition Law and the KPPU (The Commission of Supervisory of Business Competition) was born in economic democracy of Indonesia. During that time, the existence of the Business Competition Law and KPPU can be assessed as the executor and enforcer. This paper uses a normative analytical approach to examine the implementation and enforcement of the Business Competition Law and its contribution to the Indonesian economy. Analysis of the implementation, enforcement of the Business Competition Law is based on the cases that occur in Indonesia and based on the KPPU decision. The KPPU decision is seen from the aspect of implementation and enforcement of the Business Competition Law. Then, this paper also tries to connection the enactment of the Business Competition Law with its contribution to the economy. The analysis result is: 1) Business Competition Law, substantially, including a complex legal provisions, which are divided into agreements and prohibited activities. 2) KPPU tries to take a role and authority in law enforcement of business competition, but it is not yet optimal. The legal provisions for business competition have not been able to encourage vertical mobility from small companies to become medium and big companies. Facts and data still note that most companies in Indonesia are small companies. This shows that there is still a concentration of market dominance in several big companies. It is a duty of KPPU to ensure the market runs well, fair competition, and in opportunity are open. 3) KPPU has a challenge to encourage the improvement of the small companies status to medium companies, from medium companies to become a big companies by ensuring an open business climate and fair business competition. Recommendation: 1) KPPU has more realease a technical regulations related to procedures for handling cases that follow various kinds of agreements and or activities that are prohibited by the Competition Law. 2) KPPU must be more proactive and responsive related to the issues of the interests from many people. 3) KPPU must pay more attention to the development of the digital economy industry which has a potential to become one of the contributors to state income. KPPU must ensure that the development of the digital economy runs in fair business competition to bring up many new companies. Keywords. Business Competition, Business Competition Law, The Commission of Supervisory of Business Competition.