DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/lr.v22i2.83817

The Anomaly of Domesticity: Indonesian Competition Law and the Case for Extraterritoriality

1Doctoral Program, Faculty of Law, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia

2Faculty of Law, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand

3LLM Program, Faculty of Law, Universiti Malaya, Malaysia

Open Access Copyright 2026 LAW REFORM under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0.

Citation Format:
Abstract

Law No. 5 of 1999 on the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition has a significant regulatory gap due to its territorial approach which lacks the statutory support necessary for the Indonesian Competition Commission (KPPU) to address cross-border business realities. This article examines the dynamics of the KPPU’s efforts to assert jurisdiction over foreign business entities despite this lack of explicit statutory authority and argues for a necessity of aligning Indonesia’s competition framework with international standards. Utilizing a doctrinal research method, the study draws comparative insights from other Indonesian regulatory frameworks that already recognize extraterritorial reach in areas with cross-border impacts. The findings establish that as indeed, the other legal sectors in Indonesia have integrated extraterritorial principles. The competition law remains an anomaly, leaving the KPPU in an uneasy situation as it is not equipped with clear legal mandates on extraterritoriality issues. This research argues for urgent reform of Indonesia’s competition law to give it explicit extraterritorial reach. This would enable the country to address the complexities of a globalised market.

Fulltext View|Download Email colleagues
Keywords: Competition Law; Extraterritoriality; Jurisdiction; KPPU; Legal Certainty

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Research Article
Language : EN
Most cited articles
IMPLEMENTASI PENILAIAN KEBARUAN DAN PRINSIP ITIKAD BAIK DALAM PERLINDUNGAN DESAIN INDUSTRI KEBIJAKAN FORMULASI HUKUM PIDANA DALAM MELINDUNGI TRANSAKSI E - COMMERCE DI INDONESIA PENDIDIKAN HUKUM SEBAGAI PENDIDIKAN MANUSIA PENGATURAN KAWASAN KESELAMATAN OPERASI PENERBANGAN : STUDI TENTANG PELAKSANAAN KEWENANGAN PEMERINTAH DAERAH DALAM MENGENDALIKAN PEMBANGUNAN DAN BENDA TUMBUH DI KAWASAN KESELAMATAN OPERASI PENERBANGAN BANDAR UDARA AHMAD YANI SEMARANG PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP KONSUMEN DALAM TRANSAKSI E-COMMERCE More cited articles
  1. Buxbaum, H. L. (2009). Territory, territoriality, and the resolution of jurisdictional conflict. American Journal of Comparative Law, 57(3),631–676. https://doi.org/10.5131/ajcl.2008.0018
  2. Buxbaum, H. L. (2025a). The New Unilateralism in EU Cross-Border Regulation: Objectives, Methods, Institutions. Rabels Journal for Foreign and International Private Law (RabelsZ),89(3),411–431. https://doi.org/10.1628/rabelsZ-2025-0043
  3. Çorlu, H. Ç. (2021). Extraterritorial Application of EU Competition Law: The New Standard Bearer of Legal Imperialism? Ankara Journal of European Studies, 20(2), 411–446. https://doi.org/10.32450/aacd.1050057
  4. Criddle, E. J. (2024). Extraterritoriality’s Empire: How Self-Determination Limits Extraterritorial Lawmaking. American Journal of International Law, 118(4), 607–658. https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2024.33
  5. Dewi, S. M., & Anisah, S. (2022). Comparative Study Application of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction In Competition Law Between Indonesia And US Antitrust Law. International Journal of Law, Environment, and Natural Resources, 2(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.51749/injurlens.v2i1.11
  6. Eklund, A. M. (2023). Rule of Law Challenges of ‘Algorithmic Discretion’ & Automation in EU Border Control. European Journal of Migration and Law, 25(3), 249–274. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340152
  7. Erk, J. G. (2025). The Challenges of Recognising and Formalising Traditional Laws. African Journal of Legal Studies, 17(4), 405–422. https://doi.org/10.1163/17087384-12340123
  8. Furqon, E., & Effendi, H. S. (2020). Kedudukan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Dalam Memutus Pelanggaran Persaingan Usaha Menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli Dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat. Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Dan Keadilan, 7(2),323–335. https://garuda.kemdiktisaintek.go.id/documents/detail/3377841
  9. Gevurtz, F. A. (2022). Extraterritorial Application of Statutes and Regulations. American Journal of Comparative Law, 70(1), i347–i375. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avac011
  10. Koenig, C. (2017). An Economic Analyis of the Single Economic Entity Doctrine in EU. Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 13(2), 281–288. https://doi.org/10.1093/ joclec/nhx009
  11. Krisch, N. (2022). Jurisdiction Unbound: (Extra)territorial Regulation as Global Governance. European Journal of International Law, 33(2), 481–514. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chac028
  12. Kusumayudha, M. I., & Bustani, S. (2023). Kedudukan Hukum Pelaku Usaha Asing dalam Prinsip Extraterritoriality Jurisdiction pada Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum PRIORIS, 11(1), 74–98. https://doi.org/10.25105/prio.v11i1.18440
  13. Martono, M., Akbar, M. G. G., & Rahmatiar, Y. (2025). Law Enforcement of Transnational Cybercrime: Case Study in Indonesia. De Lega Lata: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 10(2), 279–286. https://doi.org/10.30596/dll.v10i2.24627
  14. Meckling, J., & Strecker, J. (2022). Green bargains: Leveraging public investment to advance climate regulation. Climate Policy, 23(4),418–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2022.2149452
  15. Nizar, M. (2018). Kejahatan nama domain berkaitan dengan merek. Yuridika, 33(1), 118–144. https://doi.org/10.20473/ydk. v33i1.5686
  16. Prabowo, M. S., & Sulistianingsih, D. (2023). Reformulation of Consumer Protection Legal Policies in the Digital Business Era in Indonesia. Diponegoro Law Review, 8(1), 14-24. https://doi.org/10.14710/dilrev.8.1. 2023.14-24
  17. Prananingtyas, P., Disemadi, H. S., & Zakiyah, N. (2020). The Indonesian business competition law: How the police plays a role?. Jurnal Hukum Novelty, 11(1), 105-113. https://doi.org/10.26555/novelty.v11i1.a15224
  18. Ramadhan, H. R., Paulus, D. H., & Marcello, G. (2023). Prohibition of monopolistic practices in business trials in Indonesia: Reforming on business competition supervisory commission. Journal of Law and Legal Reform, 4(2), 163-182. https://doi.org/10.15294/jllr.v4i2.61043
  19. Rangone, N. (2018). Making Law Effective: Behavioural Insights into Compliance. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 9(3), 483–501. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2018.51
  20. Riyanto, M., & Kovalenko, V. (2023). Partisipasi Masyarakat Menuju Negara Kesejahteraan: Memahami Pentingnya Peran Aktif Masyarakat Dalam Mewujudkan Kesejahteraan Bersama. Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia, 5(2), 374-388. https://doi.org/10.14710/jphi.v5i2.374-388
  21. Rusdianto, R., & Risnain, M. (2023). Penerapan Prinsip Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Dalam Memerangi Tindak Pidana Siber. Mataram Journal of International Law, 1(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.29303/majil.v1i1.2532
  22. Ryngaert, C. (2023). Extraterritorial Enforcement Jurisdiction in Cyberspace: Normative Shifts. German Law Journal, 24(3), 537–550. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2023.24
  23. Sherstyuk, V., Mitskaya, E., & Mahfud, M. A. (2026). Social Problems and Threats of Digital Technologies Based on Artificial Intelligence. Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia, 8(1), 46-68. https://doi.org/10. 14710/jphi.v8i1.46-68
  24. Siti, Y. (2022). Protection of Indonesia’s Personal Data after Ratification of Personal Data Protection Act. Progressive Law Review, 4(02),54–68. https://doi.org/10.36448/plr.v4i02.85
  25. Steinberg, D. A., & Tan, Y. (2023). Public responses to foreign protectionism: Evidence from the US-China trade war. Review of International Organizations, 18(1), 145–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11558-022-09468-y
  26. Stępień, B., Early, B. R., Grauvogel, J., Preble, K. A., & Truskolaski, S. (2024). The Impact of External Pressure on Companies’ Responses to Sanctions – an International Comparative Study. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 30(2), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-024-09576-y
  27. Sukarmi, S., Qaqaya, H., Susanto, F. A., & Kurniaty, R. (2021). The Qualified Effects Doctrine in the Extraterritorial of Competition Law Application: An Indonesia Perspective. Sriwijaya Law Review, 5(2), 192–204. https://doi.org/10.28946/slrev. Vol5.Iss2.1050.pp192-204
  28. Taufiq, M., Kurniawan, M. R., & Kenyo, A. S. (2025). The Legal Protection of Personal Data in the Digital Era: A Comparative Study of Indonesian Law and the GDPR. International Journal of Business, Law, and Education,6(2),1260–1268. https://doi.org/10.56442/ijble.v6i2.1178
  29. Waller, S. W. (2023). Lasting change in competition law and policy. Journal of Antitrust Enforcement, 11(2), 293–299. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaenfo/jnad006
  30. Waller, S. W. (2025). Discretionary Justice in Antitrust. Journal of Antitrust Enforcement, 13(1),17–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaenfo/jnae035
  31. Wicaksono, M. R., Raditya, K., Andrini, L., & Hawin, M. (2019). Implementing the Extraterritoriality Principle To Strengthen Competition Law Enforcement in Indonesia in the Aec Era: a Comparative Study. Indonesia Law Review, 9(1), 27–50. https://doi.org/10.15742/ilrev.v1n9.498
  32. Widayanti, T. F., Rohman, A. D., Haris, A. N. Z., Djafar, E. M., & Hakim, M. Z. (2025). Enhancing Cybersecurity And Legal Integration: Reforming Indonesia's Cyber Law To Foster Sustainable Growth In The Digital Economy. Diponegoro Law Review, 10(1), 105-119. https://doi.org/10.14710/ dilrev.10.1.2025.105-119
  33. Williams, R. C. (2022). Jurisdiction as Power. University of Chicago Law Review, 89(7), 1719–1792. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclrev/vol89/iss7/2
  34. Zagler, M. (2023). Foreign Direct Investment, Legal Uncertainty and Corporate Income Taxation. International Economics, 173, 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inteco. 2022.11.005
  35. Zelger, B. (2020). EU Competition Law and Extraterritorial Jurisdiction – A Critical Analysis of the ECJ’s Judgement in Intel. European Competition Journal, 16(2–3), 613–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/174410 56.2020.1840844
  36. Arief, B. N. (2003). Kapita Selekta Hukum Pidana. Bandung: PT. Citra Aditya Bakti
  37. Buxbaum, H. L. (2025b). Extraterritoriality in Comparative Context: Defining the Scope of State Law in a Global Era. In Extraterritoriality in Comparative Perspective (pp.3–31). Brill | Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004720183_002
  38. Elhauge, E., & Geradin, D. (2011). Global competition law and economics (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press
  39. Maarif, Y. S., Toha, K., Kagramanto, L. B., Setiawan, M., Hawin, M., Sirait, N. N., & Reza, M. (2025). Buku Teks Hukum Persaingan Usaha (3rd ed.). Jakarta: Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha
  40. Martyniszyn, M. (2023). Extraterritoriality in Competition law: changing frictions. In A. Parrish & C. Ryngaert (Eds.), Research Handbook on Extraterritoriality in International Law (pp. 389–411). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800885592. 00032
  41. Ryngaert, C., & Parrish, A. (2023). Introduction to the Research Handbook on Extraterritoriality in International Law. In Research Handbook on Extraterritoriality in International Law (pp. 1–11). Cheltenham : Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10. 4337/9781800885592.00006
  42. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2021). Developing Countries’ Experience with Extraterritoriality in Competition Law. Geneva: United Nations
  43. Whish, R., & Bailey, D. (2021). Competition Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press
  44. Imperial Chemical Industries Limited v. Commission (Case C-48/69), [1972] E.C.R. 619
  45. APF Holdings I LP, KPPU Verdict No. 09/KPPU-M/2023. (2023)
  46. Astro All Asia Network plc, et al., KPPU Verdict No. 03/KPPU-L/2008. (2008)
  47. Intel Corporation v. European Commission (Case C-240/22 P) ECLI:EU:C:2024:915
  48. IPS Marketing Resources (Singapore) Pte. Ltd., KPPU Verdict No. 18/KPPU-L/2008. (2008)
  49. Louis Dreyfus Company Melbourne Holdings Pty Ltd, KPPU Verdict No. 19/KPPU-M/2024. (2025)
  50. Manufacturers Life Insurance Company (MLIC) & International Finance Corporation (IFC), KPPU Verdict No. 17/KPPU-L/2007. (2007)
  51. Mitsui & Co Ltd dan Mitsui & Co (Australia) Ltd, KPPU Verdict No. 21/KPPU-M/2024. (2025)
  52. PON Holdings BV, KPPU Verdict No. 2/KPPU-M/2023. (2023)
  53. PT Pfizer Indonesia et al., KPPU Verdict No. 17/KPPU-I/2010 (Kasus Farmasi). (2010)
  54. Temasek Holdings Pte. Ltd. et al., KPPU Verdict No. 07/KPPU-L/2007. (2007)
  55. Toray Advance Materials Korea, KPPU Verdict No. 17/KPPU-M/2015. (2016)
  56. Travel Circle International (Mauritius) Ltd, KPPU Verdict No. 22/KPPU-M/2020. (2021)
  57. YPF Southeast Sumatra B.V., KPPU Verdict No. 08/KPPU-L/2001. (2001)
  58. European Commission. (2023). Questions & Answers – Antitrust: Commission re-imposes €376.36 million fine on Intel for anticompetitive practices in the market for computer chips. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_23_4571
  59. Association of Southeast Asian Nations. (2022). ASEAN Regional Guidelines on Competition Policy
  60. Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act, 15 U.S.C. 6a (1982)
  61. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2022). Model Law on Competition

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2026-09-25 12:52:04

No citation recorded.