Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The decision of the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) is the result of the assessment of the Commission Council read out in an open session to the public regarding whether a violation has occurred and the imposition of sanctions or the absence of a violation. The formulation of the KPPU's decision consists of the alleged violation, consideration and assessment of evidence submitted and/or obtained during the trial as well as an analysis of the application of the articles in the Antimonopoly Law which the Reported Party allegedly violated. The KPPU decision is declared to have permanent legal force, if there is no objection from the business actor, and then the KPPU decision must be implemented by the business actor and may be requested for execution at the District Court. Considering the nature and type of KPPU's decisions, when viewed from the types of decisions in civil procedural law, the KPPU's decisions are Condemnatoir decisions, namely decisions that contain punishments and can be implemented. However, the regulations regarding KPPU Decisions that have permanent legal force still do not fulfill the requirements as condemnatoir decisions because KPPU is not a judicial institution and these regulations are still multi-interpretative in nature, namely that legislators do not provide a clear interpretation of the meaning of permanent legal force in KPPU's decisions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Puspaningrum et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: