Circumstantial Evidence and Unfair Business Competition Practice: Is A Law Reform Necessary?

Salsalina Itha Karina, Ditha Wiradiputra
{"title":"Circumstantial Evidence and Unfair Business Competition Practice: Is A Law Reform Necessary?","authors":"Salsalina Itha Karina, Ditha Wiradiputra","doi":"10.22225/scj.5.2.2022.133-138","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of circumstantial evidence in unfair business competition case investigations are regulated institutionally by the Commission for the Supervision of Business Competition.  However, due to the absence of regulation as a basis of its use in the Commercial Court and the Supreme Court, this practice remains questionable.  This article aims to analyze the issue regarding the use of circumstantial evidence in the Commercial Court and the Supreme Court in order to evaluate the urgency of a law reform to the existing competition law in Indonesia.  Based on the research, it was found that there are several issues on the practice, including (1) the absence of a law regarding the use of circumstantial evidence may result in a legal certainty; (2) different views regarding the practice result in inconsistencies in law enforcement; (3) this practice contradicts the principle of the due process model which is adopted in Indonesia.  A law that is constructed systematically is necessary to ensure the legal certainty of those who are trying to seek for justice, particularly related to the enforcement of competition law.","PeriodicalId":33173,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Jurisprudence Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Jurisprudence Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22225/scj.5.2.2022.133-138","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The use of circumstantial evidence in unfair business competition case investigations are regulated institutionally by the Commission for the Supervision of Business Competition.  However, due to the absence of regulation as a basis of its use in the Commercial Court and the Supreme Court, this practice remains questionable.  This article aims to analyze the issue regarding the use of circumstantial evidence in the Commercial Court and the Supreme Court in order to evaluate the urgency of a law reform to the existing competition law in Indonesia.  Based on the research, it was found that there are several issues on the practice, including (1) the absence of a law regarding the use of circumstantial evidence may result in a legal certainty; (2) different views regarding the practice result in inconsistencies in law enforcement; (3) this practice contradicts the principle of the due process model which is adopted in Indonesia.  A law that is constructed systematically is necessary to ensure the legal certainty of those who are trying to seek for justice, particularly related to the enforcement of competition law.
间接证据与不正当商业竞争行为:法律改革是否必要?
商业竞争监督委员会对不正当商业竞争案件调查中间接证据的使用进行了制度上的规范。然而,由于在商事法庭和最高法院中缺乏作为其使用基础的规定,这种做法仍然值得怀疑。本文旨在分析关于在商业法庭和最高法院使用间接证据的问题,以评估印度尼西亚现行竞争法的法律改革的紧迫性。通过研究发现,在实践中存在以下几个问题:(1)对间接证据使用的法律缺失可能导致法律确定性;(二)对实践有不同看法,导致执法不一致的;(3)这种做法与印度尼西亚采用的正当程序模式的原则相矛盾。系统构建的法律是必要的,以确保那些试图寻求正义的人的法律确定性,特别是与竞争法的执行有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信