The Status of Evidence in Tender Conspiracy from the Perspective of Ibn Qayyim Al-Jauziyah (A Study of KPPU Decision Number 17/KPPU-L/2022 and Supreme Court Decision Number 523 K/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2024)
Main Article Content
Abstract
Indirect evidence in bid-rigging cases raises the question of when circumstantial indications become legally sufficient proof. This article examines KPPU Decision No. 17/KPPU-L/2022, Supreme Court Decision No. 523 K/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2024, and Ibn Qayyim Al-Jauziyah's concepts of al-bayyinah and qarinah. The study employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches and qualitative doctrinal analysis. It finds that indirect evidence is not a separate evidentiary category beyond Article 42 of Law No. 5 of 1999, but an inferential method based on recognized sources. KPPU regarded the initial tender cancellation, changes in the procurement team and documents, and the outcome of the repeated tender as evidence of coordination. The Supreme Court found the evidentiary connection between these events and prohibited cooperation insufficient. Within a comparative qarinah framework, these indications are more appropriately characterized as qarinah zanniyyah than qarinah qatiʿah. The article proposes a reasoned standard requiring established facts, clear inferential links, examination of lawful alternative explanations, and transparent judicial justification.
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Ahmad, Mushtaq, Muhammad Zakariya, and Z. U. al-Azhari. “Procedure of Circumstantial Evidences in Islamic Criminal Law.” Journal of Islamic and Religious Studies 4, no. 2 (2019): 67–83. https://doi.org/10.36476/JIRS.4:2.12.2019.04.
Al-Jauziyah, Ibn Qayyim. Al-Turuq al-Hukmiyyah fi al-Siyasah al-Syar’iyyah. Vol. 1. Edited by Naif bin Ahmad al-Hamd. 1st ed. Dar ‘Alam al-Fawa’id li al-Nasyr wa al-Tawzi’, 1428 AH.
Al-Jauziyah, Ibn Qayyim. Buku Pintar Memutuskan Perkara dari Rumah Tangga, Peradilan Sampai Negara. Translated by Muhammad Muchson Anasy. Jakarta: Pustaka Al-Kautsar, 2014.
Al-Zuhaili, Wahbah. Fiqh Islam wa Adillatuh. Translated by Abdul Hayyie al-Kattani et al. Jakarta: Gema Insani, 2011.
Alfian, Fajar Bima, and Rilda Murniati. “Implementasi Bukti Tidak Langsung dalam Penyelesaian Perkara Hukum Persaingan Usaha.” Jurnal Persaingan Usaha 3, no. 2 (2023): 106–119. https://jurnal.kppu.go.id/index.php/official/article/download/94/54.
Andih, Sterry Fendy. “Pengaturan Bukti Petunjuk pada Hukum Acara Persaingan Usaha dalam Kerangka Hukum Pembuktian di Indonesia.” Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana 8, no. 4 (2019).
Anugraha, Viqi, and Adlin Budhiawan. “Prinsip Pembuktian Sederhana sebagai Syarat Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Hutang.” Journal of Education Research 4, no. 2 (2023): 742–751. https://doi.org/10.37985/jer.v4i2.201.
Darmawan, Sastyo Aji. “Kekuatan Indirect Evidence dalam Pembuktian Kasus Persekongkolan Tender dan Penerapannya di Dalam Proses Tender.” Jurnal Pengadaan Barang/Jasa 1, no. 1 (2022): 10–18. https://doi.org/10.55961/jpbj.v1i1.7.
Fuady, Munir. Hukum Anti Monopoli Menyongsong Era Persaingan Sehat. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2003.
Ibrahim, Johnny. Teori dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif. Malang: Bayumedia, 2019.
Iman, Rifqi Qowiyul. “Persangkaan Hakim dalam Qarīnah Qaḍā’iyyah sebagai Instrumen Probatoris Keadilan.” MARINews, Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia, September 24, 2025. https://marinews.mahkamahagung.go.id/artikel/persangkaan-hakim-dalam-qarinah-qaaiyyah-01R.
Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha. Peraturan KPPU Nomor 2 Tahun 2023 tentang Tata Cara Penanganan Perkara Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat.
Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha. Putusan Nomor 17/KPPU-L/2022 tentang Dugaan Pelanggaran Pasal 22 Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 terkait Pengadaan Pekerjaan Pelaksanaan Proyek Revitalisasi Pusat Kesenian Jakarta Taman Ismail Marzuki Tahap III. July 18, 2023.
Laumuri, Maria Margaretha Christi Ningrum Blegur. “Pengaruh Penggunaan Indirect Evidence dalam Putusan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (Studi Putusan Nomor 04/KPPU-I/2016).” Kertha Patrika 40, no. 3 (2018): 186–199. https://doi.org/10.24843/KP.2018.v40.i03.p05.
Lubis, Andi Fahmi, Anna Maria Tri Anggraini, Toha Kurnia, et al. Hukum Persaingan Usaha: Buku Teks. 2nd ed. Jakarta: Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha, 2017.
Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. Putusan Nomor 43 PK/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2025. November 3, 2025.
Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. Putusan Nomor 523 K/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2024. July 31, 2024.
Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. Putusan Nomor 745 K/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2024. July 1, 2024.
Marjuki, Niki, and Budi Sastra Panjaitan. “Penerapan Scientific Crime Investigation (SCI) dalam Pengungkapan Kasus Tindak Pidana di Indonesia (Studi Putusan PT Medan No. 1250/Pid/2020/PT Mdn).” Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora dan Politik 5, no. 1 (2024): 537–544. https://doi.org/10.38035/jihhp.v5i1.3140.
Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. Penelitian Hukum. Rev. ed. Jakarta: Kencana, 2021.
Muhaimin. Metode Penelitian Hukum. Mataram: Mataram University Press, 2020.
Nadapdap, Binoto. Hukum Persaingan Usaha: Bukti Tidak Langsung (Indirect Evidence) Versus Tembok Kartel. Jakarta: Jala Permata Aksara, 2019.
Nugroho, Arief Sapto. “Pertentangan Putusan Sebagai Alasan Peninjauan Kembali.” Dandapala Digital, February 18, 2026. https://www.dandapala.com/kaidahHukum/detail/pertentangan-putusan-sebagai-alasan-peninjauan-kembali.
Nugroho, Susanti Adi. Hukum Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia: Dalam Teori dan Praktik serta Penerapan Hukumnya. Jakarta: Kencana, 2018.
Permata, Cahaya. “Kedudukan Sadd Adz-Dzariah sebagai Metode Istinbath Hukum Islam.” ALWAQFU: Jurnal Hukum Ekonomi dan Wakaf 5, no. 3 (2026). Published online January 28, 2025. https://jurnal.alwaqfu.or.id/index.php/alwaqfu/article/view/283.
Prasetya, Hendi Indra, and Danan Wahyu Muhammad. “Pembuktian dalam Penyelesaian Perkara Persekongkolan Tender.” Media of Law and Sharia 3, no. 1 (2022).
Republic of Indonesia. Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition.
Rokan, Mustapa Khamal. Persekongkolan Tender di Indonesia Perspektif Hukum Persaingan Usaha: Analisis Putusan KPPU tentang Persekongkolan Tender di Indonesia. Jakarta: Kencana, 2017.
Silalahi, Udin. “Indirect Evidence dalam Hukum Persaingan Usaha.” Jurnal Hukum Bisnis 32, no. 5 (2013).
Sinaga, Dina Mayasari, Martono Anggusti, and Janpatar Simamora. “Penggunaan Indirect Evidence (Alat Bukti Tidak Langsung) oleh KPPU dalam Proses Pembuktian Dugaan Praktik Kartel (Studi di Kantor Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha Wilayah I Medan).” Nommensen Journal of Legal Opinion 2, no. 1 (2021): 37–46. https://doi.org/10.51622/njlo.v2i01.207.
Siregar, Mahmul. “Bukti Tidak Langsung (Indirect Evidence) dalam Penegakan Hukum Persaingan di Indonesia.” Jurnal Hukum Samudra Keadilan 13, no. 2 (2018).
Soekanto, Soerjono, and Sri Mamudji. Penelitian Hukum Normatif: Suatu Tinjauan Singkat. Depok: Rajawali Pers, 2019.
Tampubolon, Ayu, Janpatar Simamora, and Januari Sihotang. “A Legal Analysis of the Supreme Court’s Legal Reasoning in Annulling the KPPU Decision in a Tender-Collusion Case (Decision No. 523 K/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2024).” Adagium: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum (2026). https://doi.org/10.70308/nx3c5738.
Usman, Rachmadi. Hukum Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2013.
Wardana, Yuditheo, and Hirsanuddin. “Penanganan Persekongkolan Tender Pembangunan Jalan Ruas Ngajam–Apulea Segmen III dalam Perkara Nomor 30/KPPU-I/2019 oleh Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (KPPU) Perspektif UU No. 5 Tahun 1999.” Jurnal Commerce Law 3, no. 1 (2023): 243–251.
Zulham and Mustapa Khamal Rokan. Teori Hukum Ekonomi Syariah di Indonesia: Teks ke Konteks. Medan: FEBI Press, 2022.