| dc.description.abstract | Creative industries is one of the most potential sources of GDP. Creative industries
consisting of fourteen categories, which one is film. Film is a commodity that not
only bring financial benefits but also serves as a national identity that was delivered
to the world. Indonesian film industry has a long history and had reached its peak in
the early 1980, then it had declined in 1990 and move upward over the year 2000 as a
result of the freedom and openness of information in Reformation era.
There are many factors and obstacles encountered in the effort to develop the national
film industry, one of the most important issues is the monopolistic practices in the
areas of importation and distribution and monopoly in the field of exhibition.
Monopoly of cinema theaters in one corporate network can caused a stiff competition
on film distribution, especially if the distributor company also belongs to the
corporate network cinema. Monopoly law enforcement needs to be strengthened to
reinforce the formulation of monopoly in Undang – Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999
since there are often differences between the Commission's interpretation and parties.
Therefore, it is necessary to formulate the element of fair competition, include : (1)
the guarantee of equal business opportunities for everyone, (2) competition based on
the principles of balance and proportionality, (3) de-concentration of economic power
from one or a group of businessmen.
Grup 21 is charged with a monopoly on importation and distribution. Monopoly
Watch reported Group 21 to KPPU in 2002 on charges of vertical integration (Article
14), covered agreements (Article 15), monopolies (Article 17), monopsony (Article
18), market share (Article 19), the dominant position ( Article 25), another position
(Article 26) and the majority ownership (Article 27). From eight chapters, only
Article 27 convicted. Commissions freed 21 groups of seven other chapters because there are not found evidence of monopolistic practices and or unfair business
competition as referred to Undang – Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999. This caused
reactions from the litigants, legal observers and film, as well as the public because the
Commission considered not appropriate to interpret the provisions in Undang –
Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 on this case. Commission’s Decision on Case Number
05/KPPU - L/2002 judged not fully provide certainty about how to interpret the
article - the article that takes a rule of reason approach and per se illegal approach
because they only hold formal verification. This decision also proved to be able to
equalize the unbalanced relationship between the Group 21 competition as well as
businesses can not negate the deed monopoly by Group 21, which is still repeated
today. Therefore, this decision does not fully contain the assessed value of certainty,
fairness and expediency.
This thesis is not only discusses the impact of the commission’s decision in 2002, but
also examines issues of national film until this time, which in 2009 and 2011 Grup 21
repeated it but Commission freed them at preliminary examination. To observe
problems should be studied from the national film importation and distribution stages,
production, and exhibition. There needs a concept that can be applied to develop the
national film industry by improving the terms of legal structure, substantive law and
legal culture and legal information in each phase, starting from the phase of
production, importation and distribution, and exhibition. That phases should be
improved continuously because one phase could give effects to the other phases. | en_US |
