Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition in Indonesia: A Legal Mechanism to Balance the Public Interest
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study is to explore the legal mechanism of prohibition of monopolistic practices and unfair business competition in Indonesia by looking at the role of the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU). This study was conducted using the empirical normative method. In this context, the regulatory reference used is Law No. 5 of 1999 (Anti-Monopoly Law). Other regulations are Article 34 of Law No. 5 of 1999 and Presidential Decree No. 75 of 1999 and named the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU). Several KPPU decisions analyzed were in the cities of Medan, Semarang, Surabaya, Makassar and Central Jakarta. The results showed that Law No. 5 of 1999 regarding the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition in Indonesia was formulated to the principle of balancing interests, namely the balance between the interests of business actors with the public interest. The formulation of the principle of balance can be found in the considerations, explanations and articles in Law No. 5 of 1999.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it