KPPU helps reduce unfair business practices: Chairman<\/p>\n
When the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) was
\nestablished in 2000, hopes were high that it would clamp down on
\nthe shady business deals flourishing in Indonesia that time.
\nObservers wanted the KPPU to curb monopolistic behavior and
\nscrutinize the often dubious processes for tendering jobs. Five
\nyears on, with the present tenure of most KPPU members reaching
\nan end, The Jakarta Post's Urip Hudiono talked with the
\nwatchdog's chairman Sutrisno Iwantono on Friday about what the
\ncommission had done to reform business in Indonesia. The
\nfollowing is an excerpt of the interview:<\/p>\n
Question: After five years, how is the KPPU doing?<\/p>\n
Answer: If we look at it from the number of cases that KPPU
\nhas handled since its establishment on June 7, 2000, the
\ncommission has received a total of 265 reports, with 172 of them
\nrelated to indications of unfair competition.<\/p>\n
However, of the 172 cases, only 41 had strong grounds for the
\nKPPU to further investigate, of which 23 were later ruled on by
\nthe commission and 10 more that went to the courts. Eight other
\ncases, meanwhile, are still being investigated.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, out of those earlier 23 cases, six are now being
\nreviewed in the courts, and one of the cases the Supreme Court
\nhas decided upon.<\/p>\n
Apart from the KPPU's enforcement of the country's
\nantimonopoly law through its investigations and rulings in these
\ncases, the commission has also conducted studies and given its
\nrecommendations on several government policies in the
\ntelecommunications, transportation, mining, power and retail
\nsector that could potentially create an unfair business
\ncompetition environment. So far, we have submitted a total of 23
\nrecommendations to the government.<\/p>\n
This is speaking of KPPU's accomplishments \"by quantity\". What
\nabout the commission's achievements \"by quality\", in terms of its
\naccomplishments in creating a better business competition
\nenvironment in the country?<\/p>\n
Well, the KPPU's performance will in fact be measured and
\nassessed quantitatively, but of course, the commission has always
\nbeen committed to improving business competition in the country.<\/p>\n
In terms of this, we can say that ever since the presence of
\nthe KPPU -- and though the cases that the commission has handled
\nhave only accounted to some 40 cases so far -- its effect as a
\ndeterrent has been palpable.<\/p>\n
The country's business community now pays more attention to
\nthe involvement of firms in any possible unfair business
\npractices, and it has adjusted its conduct according to the
\nantimonopoly law. Many firms have left their improper \"business-
\nas-usual\" habits behind.<\/p>\n
Many companies now offer projects through a fair and open
\nbidding process and also consult with the KPPU on how to conduct
\nsuch offerings.<\/p>\n
Therefore, I think we can say that KPPU has made a
\ncontribution to eradicating unfair business practices in the
\ncountry.<\/p>\n
Without the presence of the KPPU, many companies would
\ncontinue with their bad habits of non-transparent and
\ndiscriminatory tenders.<\/p>\n
So can we say that the KPPU is so far satisfied with its
\nachievements?<\/p>\n
As humans, we are never satisfied, and the same goes for the
\nKPPU. The commission still has a lot to do to improve its
\nperformance in the future.<\/p>\n
But I think in relative terms, as compared to other
\nantimonopoly watchdogs in other countries, the KPPU can be said
\nto be among the better performers, having achieved quite
\nsignificant results even during its infancy.<\/p>\n
And what are the problems that the KPPU still faces?<\/p>\n
There are still a lot of problems the KPPU must address so that
\nit is able to function better.<\/p>\n
These problems include internal ones, such as how the KPPU can
\nimprove its human resources and institutional capacity, as well
\nas strengthening our administrative and budgetary status.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, externally, problems also lie in our relationship
\nand cooperation with other stakeholders regarding the issue of
\nbusiness competition, including the country's business community
\nand other law enforcers, particularly the courts.<\/p>\n
Not all in the country's business community have fully
\nunderstood and accepted the antimonopoly law, while the courts
\nsometimes have a different perception than us on what the
\nantimonopoly law constitutes.<\/p>\n
The government too, continues to create policies that are not
\nalways in line with the antimonopoly law.<\/p>\n
Concerning the problems the KPPU faces with the country's
\ncourts, does this have much to do with the fact that many cases
\nthat the KPPU has ruled on have been challenged and then
\noverturned by the courts?<\/p>\n
We can't say it exactly like that, because out of the 41 cases
\nthat the KPPU has handled so far, 17 have been sustained in the
\ncourts.<\/p>\n
Although several of the KPPU's rulings were overturned at the
\ndistrict court level, they were eventually sustained at the
\nSupreme Court level.<\/p>\n
However, in one recent ruling of a case that the Supreme Court
\nhad just decided on, it overturned the district court's decision,
\nbut also revoked the KPPU's ruling. That is what we call an
\n\"ambivalent ruling\", which is quite a dilemma for us, as it
\nimplies our ruling cannot be enforced.<\/p>\n
Again, in light of these problems, will the KPPU therefore
\npush for an amendment of the antimonopoly law to better support
\nits function in improving the country's business competition
\nenvironment?<\/p>\n
The amendment is actually in process of being submitted to the
\nHouse. The commission is still finalizing its draft of
\nsuggestions for the amendment.<\/p>\n
Among the issues the KPPU needs more clarification on, is
\nwhich court has the authority to handle the objections and
\nchallenges to KPPU rulings, which at the moment can be registered
\nat any district court. The problem lies in the fact that not all
\ndistrict court judges have the ability or capacity to handle
\nantimonopoly cases.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/kppu-helps-reduce-unfair-business-practices-chairman-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}