Problematic on the Court Execution of the Decision of the Commission for the Supervisor of Business Competition in Indonesia

The issue of the execution of the decision of the Business Competition Supervisory Commission, hereinafter referred to as KPPU, has long been debated because many KPPU's decisions regarding compensation and/or fines that already have permanent legal force cannot be executed by the court. This article discusses the implementation of the KPPU's decision which was requested for execution to the court by the KPPU, because the decision was not implemented voluntarily by the Reported Party. This study uses a normative scientific method to analyze legal norms and principles, with a legal approach, a comparative approach and a case approach. Regulations concerning the prohibition of monopolistic practices and unfair business competition which have not explicitly regulated the norms regarding the authority for confiscation in the proceedings at KPPU have resulted in the KPPU's case decisions not stipulating confiscation, including the confiscation of guarantees. The author is of the opinion that the law that regulates business competition law significantly needs to add a norm regarding confiscation so that KPPU has the authority to confiscate in the case examination process, to ensure certainty that the KPPU's decision on compensation and/or fines can be executed in the future.