KEDUDUKAN KOMISI PENGAWAS PERSAINGAN USAHA DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN INDONESIA

The purpose of this study is to analyze the position of the BusinessCompetition Supervisory Commission in the Indonesian regulatory system. Toanalyze the overlap of authority between the Business Competition SupervisoryCommission and other existing State Institutions. The Business CompetitionSupervisory Commission is an institution established based on Law No. 5 of 1999concerning the Prohibition of Monopoly Practices and Unfair BusinessCompetition with the aim of overseeing the implementation. The BusinessCompetition Supervisory Commission is a state agency that has authority over theenforcement of business competition laws. The Business Competition SupervisoryCommission has a function as a supervisor of business competition lawenforcement as well as having a function as an institution that decides whether ornot there is a violation of business competition. These two main functions makethis institution an institution that serves as an active supervisor in terms of directsupervision, and as a passive supervisor in terms of adjudicating businesscompetition violations.This type of research is qualitative by using normative juridical approach.The type of data used is secondary data with library study data collectiontechniques. Secondary data in the form of primary legal materials, secondary legalmaterials. Furthermore, the data is analyzed qualitatively.Based on the results of research and discussion, it can be concluded that first,KPPU is an independent non-structural institution and is under the executiveauthority. KPPU is one of the institutions that has the authority in overseeing theimplementation of the Antitrust Law. KPPU was formed as an institution thatspecifically supervises businesses in carrying out their business activities so as notto conduct monopoly practices or unfair business competition. Like most stateinstitutions, KPPU's position is merely a complement to the main stateinstitutions. This is based on the fact that the birth of KPPU does not necessarilynegate the role of major state institutions in overseeing the implementation of theAntitrust Law. The second conclusion is that the Authority of KPPU is basicallyclearly stated in Article 36 of the Antitrust Law, but in carrying out theseauthorities there are limits that cannot be exceeded by KPPU.Keywords: Authority of KPPU, Business Actors, State Institutions