Analisis yuridis terhadap persekongkolan tender dan penerapan pembuktian tidak langsung (indirect evidence) studi kasus terhadap putusan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha dan Badan Peradilan di Indonesia = Juridical analysis in terms of both tender conspiracy and application of indirect evidence : case study on award of business competition commission supervisory and judicature institution in Indonesia / Ibnu Abas Ali
| Main Author: | Ibnu Abas Ali, author |
|---|---|
| Format: | Masters Bachelors |
| Terbitan: |
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia
, 2013
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: |
http://lib.ui.ac.id/file?file=digital/20349032-T35456-Ibnu Abas Ali.pdf |
| ctrlnum |
20349032 |
|---|---|
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<dc schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd"><title>Analisis yuridis terhadap persekongkolan tender dan penerapan pembuktian tidak langsung (indirect evidence) : studi kasus terhadap putusan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha dan Badan Peradilan di Indonesia = Juridical analysis in terms of both tender conspiracy and application of indirect evidence : case study on award of business competition commission supervisory and judicature institution in Indonesia / Ibnu Abas Ali</title><creator>Ibnu Abas Ali, author</creator><type>Thesis:Masters</type><place/><publisher>Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia</publisher><date>2013</date><description><b>ABSTRAK</b><br>
Tesis ini membahas penafsiran hukum Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha dalam membuktikan terjadinya persekongkolan tender dengan menggunakan pendekatan pembuktian tidak langsung (indirect evidence) sebagai alat bukti yang dijadikan pertimbangan dan dasar hukum dalam memeriksa dan memutus perkara persekongkolan tender dan penafsiran hukum Badan Peradilan terhadap pendekatan pembuktian tidak langsung (indirect evidence). Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum yuridis normatif yang bersifat deskriptif analisis dengan menggunakan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konseptual dengan teknik analisis data secara kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pembuktian perkara persekongkolan tender dilakukan oleh Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha dengan memperluas penafsiran hukum terhadap unsur-unsur persekongkolan tender sebagaimana dimaksud dalam ketentuan Pasal 22 UU No.5 Tahun 1999 maupun pedoman Pasal 22. Pembuktian terhadap penerapan unsur-unsur persekongkolan tender dimaksud juga menggunakan alat bukti tidak langsung (indirect evidence) yang diinterpretasikan sebagai alat bukti petunjuk. Selanjutnya dalam proses pemeriksaan keberatan di tingkat Pengadilan Negeri dan pemeriksaan kasasi pada Mahkamah Agung terdapat perbedaan penafsiran hukum terhadap unsur persekongkolan tender khususnya dalam konteks penerapan prinsip pembuktian dengan menggunakan alat bukti tidak langsung (indirect evidence). Dalam analisis penerapan alat bukti tidak langsung ini pertimbangan Badan Peradilan dilandasakan pada penafsiran bahwa dalam hukum persaingan usaha, bukti terjadinya persekongkolan tender dianggap cukup apabila ditemukan beberapa petunjuk atau bukti tidak langsung (indirec evidence) yang bersesuaian dengan beberapa peristiwa lainnya (plus factors).
<hr>
<b>ABSTRACT</b><br>
This thesis discuss law interpretation of Business Competition Commission Supervisory in order to prove any tender conspiracy using indirect evidence approach as considerations and law base to examine and decide case of tender conspiracy and law interpretation of Judicature Institution against indirect evidence approach. This is normative juridical law research in analysis description using both rules and regulations approach and conceptual approach with qualitative data analysis technique. Research results indicated case evidence of tender conspiracy conducted by Business Competition Commission Supervisory and expansion of law interpretation of tender conspiracy elements either as referred to in Article 22 of Laws No.5 of 1999 or guidance of Article 22. Proving of such law interpretation of tender conspiracy elements also used indirect evidence interpreted as guide evidence. However, in objectionable examination process at District Court level and cessation examination at Court Supreme it had been found the difference of law interpretation against tender conspiracy elements, in context of evidence principles application using indirect evidence. In this case, the considerations of Judicature Institution based on interpretation that in law of business competition, the evidence of tender conspiracy is adequate or sufficient provided some guides or indirect evidences had been found as well as there are suitability with other events (plus factors).</description><subject>Antitrust law--Indonesia</subject><identifier>20349032</identifier><source>http://lib.ui.ac.id/file?file=digital/20349032-T35456-Ibnu Abas Ali.pdf</source><recordID>20349032</recordID></dc>
|
| format |
Thesis:Masters Thesis Thesis:Bachelors |
| author |
Ibnu Abas Ali, author |
| title |
Analisis yuridis terhadap persekongkolan tender dan penerapan pembuktian tidak langsung (indirect evidence) : studi kasus terhadap putusan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha dan Badan Peradilan di Indonesia = Juridical analysis in terms of both tender conspiracy and application of indirect evidence : case study on award of business competition commission supervisory and judicature institution in Indonesia / Ibnu Abas Ali |
| title_sub |
studi kasus terhadap putusan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha dan Badan Peradilan di Indonesia = Juridical analysis in terms of both tender conspiracy and application of indirect evidence : case study on award of business competition commission supervisory and judicature institution in Indonesia / Ibnu Abas Ali |
| publisher |
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia |
| publishDate |
2013 |
| topic |
Antitrust law--Indonesia |
| url |
http://lib.ui.ac.id/file?file=digital/20349032-T35456-Ibnu Abas Ali.pdf |
| contents |
<b>ABSTRAK</b><br>
Tesis ini membahas penafsiran hukum Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha dalam membuktikan terjadinya persekongkolan tender dengan menggunakan pendekatan pembuktian tidak langsung (indirect evidence) sebagai alat bukti yang dijadikan pertimbangan dan dasar hukum dalam memeriksa dan memutus perkara persekongkolan tender dan penafsiran hukum Badan Peradilan terhadap pendekatan pembuktian tidak langsung (indirect evidence). Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum yuridis normatif yang bersifat deskriptif analisis dengan menggunakan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konseptual dengan teknik analisis data secara kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pembuktian perkara persekongkolan tender dilakukan oleh Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha dengan memperluas penafsiran hukum terhadap unsur-unsur persekongkolan tender sebagaimana dimaksud dalam ketentuan Pasal 22 UU No.5 Tahun 1999 maupun pedoman Pasal 22. Pembuktian terhadap penerapan unsur-unsur persekongkolan tender dimaksud juga menggunakan alat bukti tidak langsung (indirect evidence) yang diinterpretasikan sebagai alat bukti petunjuk. Selanjutnya dalam proses pemeriksaan keberatan di tingkat Pengadilan Negeri dan pemeriksaan kasasi pada Mahkamah Agung terdapat perbedaan penafsiran hukum terhadap unsur persekongkolan tender khususnya dalam konteks penerapan prinsip pembuktian dengan menggunakan alat bukti tidak langsung (indirect evidence). Dalam analisis penerapan alat bukti tidak langsung ini pertimbangan Badan Peradilan dilandasakan pada penafsiran bahwa dalam hukum persaingan usaha, bukti terjadinya persekongkolan tender dianggap cukup apabila ditemukan beberapa petunjuk atau bukti tidak langsung (indirec evidence) yang bersesuaian dengan beberapa peristiwa lainnya (plus factors).
<hr>
<b>ABSTRACT</b><br>
This thesis discuss law interpretation of Business Competition Commission Supervisory in order to prove any tender conspiracy using indirect evidence approach as considerations and law base to examine and decide case of tender conspiracy and law interpretation of Judicature Institution against indirect evidence approach. This is normative juridical law research in analysis description using both rules and regulations approach and conceptual approach with qualitative data analysis technique. Research results indicated case evidence of tender conspiracy conducted by Business Competition Commission Supervisory and expansion of law interpretation of tender conspiracy elements either as referred to in Article 22 of Laws No.5 of 1999 or guidance of Article 22. Proving of such law interpretation of tender conspiracy elements also used indirect evidence interpreted as guide evidence. However, in objectionable examination process at District Court level and cessation examination at Court Supreme it had been found the difference of law interpretation against tender conspiracy elements, in context of evidence principles application using indirect evidence. In this case, the considerations of Judicature Institution based on interpretation that in law of business competition, the evidence of tender conspiracy is adequate or sufficient provided some guides or indirect evidences had been found as well as there are suitability with other events (plus factors). |
| id |
IOS18064.20349032 |
| institution |
Universitas Indonesia |
| institution_id |
51 |
| institution_type |
library:university library |
| library |
Perpustakaan Universitas Indonesia |
| library_id |
492 |
| collection |
Repository Skripsi (open) Universitas Indonesia |
| repository_id |
18064 |
| city |
KOTA DEPOK |
| province |
JAWA BARAT |
| repoId |
IOS18064 |
| first_indexed |
2022-12-13T09:15:59Z |
| last_indexed |
2022-12-13T09:15:59Z |
| recordtype |
dc |
| merged_child_boolean |
1 |
| _version_ |
1752207220156661760 |
| score |
17.205147 |