KAJIAN YURIDIS PERSEKONGKOLAN TENDER PENGADAAN PEKERJAAN KONSTRUKSI PEMBANGUNAN STADION MANDALA KRIDA DAERAH ISTIMEWA YOGYAKARTA

Eksy Puji Rahayu, Sudiyana Sudiyana

Abstract


Abstract Tender conspiracy is the most serious violation in business competition cases and is contrary to economic democracy, because it does not provide equal opportunities for every citizen to participate in the process of producing and marketing goods/services in a healthy, effective, and efficient business climate. In the KPPU's Decision Number 10/KPPU-I/2017 it is stated that, Reported Parties I to Reported Parties IX have been legally and convincingly proven to have conspired to tender in the procurement of construction work for the construction of the Mandala Krida Stadium. At the appeal level, the Sleman District Court handed down Decision Number 19/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2019/PN Smn which rejected the Petitioners' objection. At the cassation level, the Supreme Court in Decision Number 893 K/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2020 upheld Decision Number 19/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2019/PN Smn and Decision Number 10/KPPU-I/2017. The purpose of this study is to find out, examine, and analyze the suitability of KPPU's handling of the case of conspiracy to tender the procurement of construction work for the construction of the Mandala Krida Stadium in the Province of Yogyakarta with the applicable laws and regulations, as well as those that are considered by judges both at the district court and the Supreme Court. in strengthening the KPPU's decision Number 10/KPPU-I/2017. This type of research includes normative legal research, using qualitative descriptive analysis. The results of the study show that the KPPU's handling of case Number 10/KPPU-I/2017 and the judges' considerations at the Sleman District Court and the Supreme Court have been in accordance with what is stipulated in the applicable legal provisions. However, the rule of reason approach used by KPPU in this case is considered inappropriate.

Keywords


Tender Conspiracy, KPPU Handling, Judge's Consideration

Full Text:

PDF (Indonesian)

References


A.M. Tri Anggraini. 2007. “Sanksi Dalam Perkara Persekongkolan Tender Berdasarkan UU Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan 8 Praktik Monopoli Dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat”. Jurnal Hukum Bisnis.

Alun Simbolon. 2012. “Kedudukan Hukum Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Melaksanakan Wewenang Penegakan Hukum Persaingan Usaha”. Jurnal Mimbar Hukum. Volume 24 No. 3. Oktober 2012. Yogyakarta: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada.

Asmah. 2019. “Penerapan Sanksi Denda Terhadap Kasus Persekongkolan Tender Jalan Nasional”. Jurnal Yudisial. Vol.12 No.2. Agustus 2019.

Daniel Jusuf Said Sembiring. 2016. “Persekongkolan Tender Secara Vertikal dan Gabungan Horizontal dan Vertikal di Indonesia Ditinjau dari Putusan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Tahun 2013 Sampai Tahun 2014”. Jurnal Fakultas Hukum Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta.

Dewi Nawang Wulan. 2019. “Persekongkolan Tender Dalam Persaingan Usaha Menurut UU No. 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat”. Imbar Yustitia. Vol. 3 No. 3. Desember 2019.

Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat.

Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 Tentang Cipta Kerja.

Peraturan Presiden Nomor 38 Tahun 2015 Tentang Kerjasama Pemerintah Dengan Badan Usaha Dalam Penyediaan Infrastruktur.

Peraturan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Nomor 2 Tahun 2010 Tentang Pedoman Pasal 22 Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Persekongkolan Dalam Tender.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.37159/jmih.v6i1.1668

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2022 Kajian Hasil Penelitian Hukum

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

View My Stats