Analisis Rule of Reason terhadap Penyalahgunaan Posisi Dominan (Studi Komparatif: Indonesia, Uni Eropa, dan Amerika Serikat)

VEGITYA RAMADHANI-PUTRI, SH, S.ANT, Prof. M. Hawin, S.H., LL.M., Ph. D.

2012 | Tesis | S2 Ilmu Hukum

Pengaturan dan penegakan hukum terhadap penyalahgunaan posisi dominan dalam UU No.5 tahun 1999 membutuhkan metode analisis Rule of Reason. Hal tersebut dikarenakan dalam menentukan eksistensi posisi dominan dan eksistensi penyalahgunaan posisi dominan membutuhkan pengukuran terhadap unsur-unsur eksistensi posisi dominan tersebut, yaitu antara lain definisi pasar bersangkutan, market power, konsentrasi pasar, pangsa pasar, dan hambatan masuk. Sedangkan untuk menentukan adanya penyalahgunaan posisi dominan, dibutuhkan pengukuran secara kualitatif maupun kuantitatif terhadap derajat ketergantungan antar kompetitor, dampak kerugian pada kompetitor, dampak kerugian pada konsumen, dan pihak-pihak lain. Penyalahgunaan posisi dominan pada Competition Law di Uni Eropa diatur dalam Article 82 Rome Treaty. Dalam Article 82 Rome Treaty, pelaku usaha yang memiliki posisi dominan memiliki tanggung-jawab spesial untuk menjaga perilakunya sedemikian rupa supaya tidak memberlakukan syarat-syarat perdagangan secara tidak adil, tidak melakukan pembatasan terhadap produk, pasar, maupun inovasi yang merugikan konsumen, tidak melakukan diskriminasi terhadap pelaku usaha lain untuk transaksi sejenis, dan juga tidak menerapkan perjanjian yang tidak relevan dengan perjanjian pokok sehingga merugikan mitra dagang. Oleh karena itu, untuk menentukan eksistensi posisi dominan tersebut, diperlukan analisis struktur pasar secara komprehensif. Antitrust Law di Amerika Serikat diatur dalam Sherman Act. Dalam Section 1 Sherman Act, setiap kontrak, kombinasi kontrak, ataupun strategi yang mengekang perdagangan adalah illegal. Sedangkan Pada Section 2 Sherman Act, monopolisasi dapat dianggap sebagai suatu pelanggaran. Untuk menentukan apakah suatu tindakan atau perjanjian tersebut mengekang perdagangan, ataupun suatu tindakan monopolisasi, diperlukan penelitian dan analisa secara komprehensif. Metode yang komprehensif tersebut dikenal sebagai Rule of Reason. Analisis Rule of Reason berbasis kasus per kasus tentang dampak propersaingan ataukah antipersaingan. KPPU menerapkan metode Rule of Reason ketika memeriksa kasus-kasus penyalahgunaan posisi dominan. Hal tersebut tampak pada analisis terhadap 3 kasus penyalahgunaan posisi dominan yang ditangani dengan menggunakan Pasal 25 UU No.5 Tahun 1999, yaitu kasus Baterai ABC, kasus Carrefour-Alfamart, dan kasus Terminal Cargo. Dalam memutuskan perkara-perkara penyalahgunaan posisi dominan tersebut, KPPU menggunakan berbagai instrumen ekonomi ketika meneliti struktur pasar, misalnya definisi pasar, market power, konsentrasi pasar, pangsa pasar, maupun hambatan masuk, sekaligus menganalisis dampak penyalahgunaan posisi dominan tersebut terhadap dinamika persaingan, kerugian kompetitor, maupun kerugian konsumen. Berangkat dari analisis kasus-kasus tersebut, dapat disimpulkan bahwa dalam menerapkan Pasal 25 UU No.5 Tahun 1999 tentang larangan penyalahgunaan posisi dominan pada kasus-kasus yang telah ditangani tersebut, KPPU mengkombinasikan instrumen analisis Rule of Reason secara komprehensif, meskipun KPPU menerapkan analisis yang berbeda pada masing-masing kasus.

Law enforcement against abuse of dominance in Antimonopoli Act of Indonesia needs Rule of Reason as analytical method. The inquiries determines the existence of dominance and the existence of abuse of dominance. Indication of the existences, such as: measurement of definition of relevant market, market power, market consentration, market share, and entry barriers. Accordingly, the indicators of abuse of dominance are dependentcy among competitors, harms or damages on competitors, effects on consumers, and disinsentives for others counterparts, qualitatively as well as quantitatively. Abuse of dominance that regulated at Competition Law in European Communities based on Article 82 Rome Treaty. According Article 82 Rome Treaty, any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within the common market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible with the common market insofar as it may affect trade between EC Member States. Such abuse may, in particular, consist in: (a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices or other unfair trading conditions; (b) limiting production, markets or technical development to the prejudice of consumers; (c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage; (d) making the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts. Accordingly, to determine the existence of dominance, it needs inquiries and analyses toward market structures comprehensively, by economic approaches as well as legal considerations. Antitrust law in United States constituted in Sherman Act. The Sherman Act are not specifically highlightes abuse of dominance, because the undertakings must treated equally, regardless their market power degree. Based on Section 1 Sherman Act, every contract, combination or conspiracy that restrains interstate trade or trade with foreign nations is illegal. Hence, in Section 2 Sherman Act, every person who shall monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several states, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony. To consider which some actions or contracts are restrains or constarins trade, as well as monopolization, it needed comprehensive analysis. Comprehensive methode of analysis in Antitrust Law was tittled as Rule of Reason. Based on case by case, the Rule of Reason considers the anticompetition as well as procompetition, qualitatively and quantitatively effects. Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (Indonesian Fair Trade Commission) applies Rule of Reason while inquires the cases of abuse of dominance. The method was prominent while KPPU analyses 3 cases of abuse of dominance, such Baterai ABC case, Carrefour-Alfamart case, and Terminal Cargo case. Measuring the cases, KPPU uses economics instruments to analyse market structure, such definition of relevant market, market power, market consentration, market shares, entry barriers, and impacts of the abuse toward competition itself, competitiors, costumers and consumers. Departed from those cases, can be consluded that empowers Article 25 Law No.25/1999 about the prohibition of abuse of dominance, KPPU combinates many instruments of Rule of Reason method comprehensively, eventhough KPPU treates each case differently, or case per case.

Kata Kunci :