| Summary: | A Proof method on the cartel association in Indonesia is one of the problems that
surfaced in recent years and polemical in the community , especially for business . Issues
raised about the issue in question is the method of proving the cartel carried out the
Commission , in this case related to a commodity consumption of a cooking oil , as defined in
the Commission Decision No. 24/KPPU-I/2009 . KPPU using the indirect evidence to
ensnare 21 (twenty one ) business cooking oil industry , in relation to the cartel allegations .
The indirect evidence that the Commission applied as a concern for the Commission to make
the indirect evidence as the main evidence in proving the eligibility of the cartel businesses .
In fact, the indirect evidence can only be used as a supporting or reinforcing one type of
evidence set forth in Article 42 Competition Act . The Commission also stated its decision to
the unavailability of data and the production of edible oil trade volume in the domestic
market , which would be its own weaknesses . Of that decision , the cooking oil industry
appealed to the Central Jakarta District Court and this Central Jakarta District Court granted
the request of businessmen objected , citing about unidentified sheme of competition in the
indirect evidence under the legal system in Indonesia.
This study aims to determine the impact of the cartel arrangements and the carter for
cooking oil industry, with evidentiary conducted by the Commission in deciding the case of
cooking oil cartel as well as knowing how the efforts objections made by the cooking oil
industry businesses. The data used primary and secondary data. The data collected, processed
and analyzed and conducted interviews to relevant sources.
From the research it can be concluded first, the cartel arrangement affects the cooking
oil industry. It can be seen from the growth rate of the industry is increasingly competitive
market of the cooking oil to meet consumer cooking oil market in Indonesia, both bulk and
packaged. Second, the Commission's belief that indirect evidence can be used in the
determination of a cartel is a challenge and breakthrough to be answered within the national
legal system of Indonesia. It has been a challenge and a breakthrough because it is not an
easy finding concerning the required indicators cartel legislation referring to the dominant
direct evidence. Third, the argument of the cooking oil industry businesses are not doing
cartels which can occur due to lack of knowledge about the cartel business people or on the
contrary, they actually do act cartel amid the weakness in the rule of law.
|
|---|