COMPARATIVE COMPETITION POLICY BETWEEN INDONESIA &

CAMBODIA AS A PART OF THE ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN

NATIONS (ASEAN)
(business competition law course assignments)

Allya Nadhira Putri (010001800533)

Fajar zufarreza hasibuan (010001800178)
Fika A. Ramadhani (010001800195)
Mohammad Ghifari (010001800301)
Valdo (010001800500)

FACULTY OF LAW – UNIVERSITAS TRISAKTI

JAKARTA
2021
FOREWORD
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

I. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Competition policy is part of the AEC 2025 Blueprint which highlights the
need for an effective competition regime, with strengthened capacities, a region that is
more conscious of competition, and applies regional arrangements on competition. It
is hoped that a strong and enforceable competition law will support the creation of a
more competitive and innovative territory by providing an equal playing field for all
companies, especially micro, small and medium enterprises. To achieve this goal, the
ASEAN Experts Group on Competition (AEGC) was formed as a forum to discuss
and coordinate competition policies, with the aim of fostering a healthy competitive
environment in the ASEAN region. The AEGC consists of representatives nominated
by AMS from the respective competition authorities if these competition authorities
have been established; and of the bodies most directly involved and responsible for
competition policy in ASEAN Member States for which a competition authority has
not been established.

The Cambodian legal system is a hybrid system of civil law, influenced by the
French system after colonisation, and common law, influenced by international aid
and assistance to legal and judicial reform in Cambodia.

In the last few years, Cambodia's macroeconomic growth has been growing at
a stable rate of 6.9% to 7.6% every year and is expected to continue at the same rate
in the upcoming year.

To adopt the law on competition is one of the Cambodia’s commitments to

ASEAN and WTO. In accordance with this commitment, the Ministry of Commerce
of Cambodia has established the Working Group on Drafting Competition Law
responsible for designing and reviewing the draft law, facilitating the whole process
of competition law enactment and discussing on the competition-related issues.

The draft law has been reviewed and finalized among the Working Group on
Drafting Competition Law and international experts from Australia Competition and
Consumer Commission (ACCC). As scheduled, this draft law is expected to submit to
the Council of Minister of Cambodia at the end of 2016 and to the National Assembly
by the beginning of 2017.

The purpose of this law is to establish provisions and procedures applicable to

unlawful practices of restraint of competition and to promote and protect the benefits
of competitive market economy of Cambodia. The law will cover (i) unlawful
agreements which prevent, restrict or distort competition, (ii) abuse of a dominant
position, and (iii) any business combination which has the effect of significantly
preventing, restricting or distorting competition in a market.
 Unlike the Cambodia, Indonesia has had laws and regulations on business
competition law since 1999, specifically, Law number 5 year 1999 about Anti
Monopoly Practice and Unfair Business Competition.

In 2020, The Government of Indonesia and The House of Representatives of

The Republic Of Indonesia (DPR RI) passed Omnibus Law on Job Creation Bill into
law, on Monday, 5 October 2020. Omnibus Law on Job Creation includes several
revisions to the competition law, the appeal process of the KPPU decision will be
carried out by the Commercial Court and no longer by the District Court. Omnibus
Law also regulates the minimum amount of administrative penalties for competition
cases (IDR 1 billion), and does not set a maximum amount. Further arrangements on
administrative penalties and appeal process are stipulated in the Government
Regulation of Republic Indonesia Number 44 Year 2021 on the Prohibition of
Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition.

II. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

 What are the differences in competition law regulations between Indonesia &
Cambodia
 Which state is more efficient & stronger of competition law regulations between
Indonesia & Cambodia


III. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

 To Identify the differences competition law regulation between Indonesia &
Cambodia
 To know about the business competition law system from Indonesia & Cambodia

 CHAPTER 2
ANALYSIS

BLABLABLA…..

THE REVISION OF THE LAW COMPETITION ON INDONESIA OMNIBUSLAW

2020
Government Highlights Compliance in Violation of Competition Laws
The most notable revision in the Omnibus Law is the removal of the cap on administrative
fine and criminal sanctions.
Initially, the Indonesia Competition Commission or KPPU can impose an administrative fine
between IDR 1 billion to IDR 25 billion. Now, although the minimum of IDR 1 billion still
applies, the IDR 25 billion cap has been taken out.
In addition, it used to be the case that violation of substantive laws and/or obstruction of a
KPPU examination or investigation are subject to criminal sanctions. Under the Omnibus
Law, criminal sanctions only apply for obstruction of KPPU examination or investigation.
The sanctions are now more severe with imprisonment of up to one year (from previously
imprisonment of up to three months) for substituting criminal fines of up to IDR 5 billion. On
the other hand, additional criminal sanctions such as revocation of license and prohibition to
act as a director or commissioner have been taken out.
New appeal procedure
The current law's ecosystem only allows an appeal in a competition case to be lodged to the
district courts. Despite moving the appeal process to the commercial court, the Omnibus Law
and other prevailing regulations do not provide any further details. The current procedural
laws and regulations applicable in the commercial court only apply to cases on intellectual
property, bankruptcy, or liquidation, each of which is subject to different procedures and is
regulated in different laws.
Consequently, this new appeal procedure for competition cases will most likely trigger other
potential concerns in practice. It remains unclear whether the civil procedural law will apply
or whether the Supreme Court will temporarily fill the gap by issuing a circular letter to allow
the appeal of a competition case to be heard in the commercial court.
REFERENCES
https://www.ahp.id/the-omnibus-law-removes-cap-on-fines-for-competition-law-violations
https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/3-524-4317?
transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true
https://www.asean-competition.org/selectcountry=Cambodia