Fungsi dan Lembaga KPPU Dalam Praktek Persaingan Usaha di Kota Medan

Abstract

The creation of a healthy business climate as a means of creating democracy in economics that need to be pursued in a planned and continuously, followed by a competition policy as well as deterrence against businesses as well as deterrence against businesses that engage in the practice of monopoly and competition unfair. To prevent and crack down on businesses that conduct unfair competition it is necessary to rule of law. Without the rule of law, fair competition is not likely to be realized. Type of research in this thesis is a normative legal research. This study aims to examine the legal regulation of unfair business competition in Indonesia. To determine and analyze the role and functions of the KPPU in the institution supervision and enforcement of competition law in the city of Medan and to identify and analyze the factors that inhibit the KPPU Field Office in the performance of duties of supervision and enforcement of competition law. Legal arrangements related to unfair competition practices. At the date of February 18, 1999 Law No. 5 Year 1999 concerning Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition or Antitrust Act made for the support of the IMF approved DPR, which was then signed by the President on March 5, 1999. The role and functions of the KPPU Representative Office in Medan. The role and functions of the KPPU in accordance with Article 35 of the KPPU duties. Medan City KPPU Office oversees three jurisdictions, namely North Sumatra, West Sumatra, Aceh Province. Of the 26 reports received by the KPD KPPU Medan during the year 2011, that reports of alleged violations of the Act No. 5 of 1999, especially Article 22 of conspiracy in tender very dominating. Half of these reports are even asking the KPPU to order the tender committee to repeat collusive tendering process nuanced and full of KKN (Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism). Factors that inhibit the Business Competition Supervisory KPPU Representative Office in Medan. The internal resistance in the faced KPPU Medan office is the authority of the execution authority. Because it does not have the authority to execute, then the KPPU can not be executed. The external obstacles to be faced by the Office of Medan Representative if the defendant is not present, so the need to forceful measures, while making efforts to force the KPPU should cooperate with other agencies. While the effort to overcome these obstacles is the Internal Efforts undertaken KPPU Regional Medan Office-related barriers to the execution authority, the KPPU in cooperation with the District Court for execution. The external efforts undertaken KPPU Regional Medan Office related to the absence of the defendant forced effort.